Does the Urban Renewal Bill conflict with property ownership rights?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Urban Renewal Bill could potentially conflict with property ownership rights under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution
PAS Youth Malaysia has claimed that the proposed Urban Renewal Act (URA) Bill could conflict with Article 13 of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees citizens’ rights to property ownership. Its youth chief, Afnan Hamimi Taib Azamudden, said the Bill’s changes to redevelopment consent requirements and its potential to enable en bloc sales could risk undermining those property rights. He also warned that if the Bill is not implemented fairly and transparently, it could lead to long-term displacement effects.
PAS Youth says reduced consent could sideline dissenting owners
Afnan Hamimi Taib Azamudden argued that the Bill would reduce the level of consent needed from residents for redevelopment projects. He said this reduction could open the door for exploitation by developers, where minority or dissenting residents’ voices could be sidelined, whereas under the current approach 100 per cent consent was required for redevelopment. He also pointed to the possibility that the Bill could allow en bloc sale of entire strata developments even if not all owners agree.
The Bill’s consent thresholds differ from the current requirement of 100 per cent
Under current laws, 100 per cent agreement from all residents and stakeholders is required, according to the claims made by PAS Youth Malaysia. The Bill is proposing lower thresholds: 80 per cent for buildings over 30 years old, 75 per cent if buildings are damaged, and 51 per cent if buildings are unsafe or abandoned. PAS Youth framed these lower thresholds as a key factor that could weaken owners’ standing in redevelopment decisions.
The constitutional concern centres on Article 13’s property ownership guarantee
Afnan said the more worrying issue is that the Bill’s implementation could potentially conflict with Article 13, which guarantees citizens’ rights to property ownership. His concern was tied to how redevelopment approvals and en bloc mechanisms could operate when consent is reduced from the previous 100 per cent standard. He linked this to the risk that original residents’ rights may not be protected.
PAS Youth links the issue to fair and transparent implementation
PAS Youth Malaysia stated that it does not reject the principle of viable and inclusive urban redevelopment, but it stressed that implementation must be carried out fairly and transparently. It also said implementation should never sacrifice the rights of original residents for the profit of vested interests. The group warned that without fair handling, the long-term effects could contribute to racial polarisation, with displacement from elite areas due to economic pressure and urban gentrification.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Does the Urban Renewal Bill conflict with property ownership rights?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends