Controversy over Malaysia’s proposed Urban Renewal Act: PM Anwar says Malay land rights won’t be affected

Pushing Out the Vulnerable: Critics Warn of Unfair Urban Renewal

The proposed Urban Renewal Act has sparked significant controversy in Malaysia, with critics arguing that it unfairly targets vulnerable communities and favors large-scale developers. Long before the Bill was tabled in parliament, it faced backlash from politicians, property owners, and rights groups. Opponents claim that the legislation could displace low- and middle-income residents, particularly from marginalized ethnic groups, and pave the way for unchecked gentrification. The debate has highlighted deeper concerns about racial and economic inequities in urban development.

At the forefront of the criticism is Kubang Kerian MP Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, the deputy president of the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS). Tuan Ibrahim has argued that existing laws are already sufficient to manage urban development and that the new Act is unnecessary. He emphasizes that the focus should instead be on ensuring that urban demographics are not dominated by a single racial group. “What is more important is ensuring that urban demographics are not monopolised by a single race,” he said. This statement reflects his concern that the Bill could exacerbate racial disparities in urban areas.

Tuan Ibrahim also warned that the Act could lead to the displacement of long-time residents. He pointed out that homeowners who originally purchased their properties for over RM100,000 would be unable to afford the same homes if they were redeveloped at prices exceeding RM500,000. “Once this Act is passed, the affected areas will be redeveloped. Those who previously bought homes for over RM100,000 will not be able to afford to repurchase them at over RM500,000,” he said. He further accused the government of favoring capitalists, particularly ethnic Chinese developers, who he claims would monopolize the redevelopment process. “So the minister wants capitalists to monopolise the process. This is a subtle method to push out those who cannot afford it, particularly Malays and Indians,” he added.

A Bill That Favors Developers Over People?

PAS Youth leader Hafez has echoed Tuan Ibrahim’s concerns, arguing that the Bill will undermine the rights of minorities and destabilize socio-economic balance. In a statement on February 25, Hafez said, “This Bill is also seen to put pressure on urban residents, especially the Malay community who are less able. This new legal provision is found to favour developers who are interested in the name of urban renewal. Minorities will be oppressed. They will be forced to move out and surrender their land against their will.” He warned that the Bill would effectively silence minority voices and deny them a say in decisions that affect their lives and properties.

The National House Buyers Association (HBA) has also raised concerns about the Bill, though its focus is more on the legal implications. Secretary-general Chang Kim Loong argued that the proposed reduction in the consent threshold for property redevelopment violates property rights protected under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution. Currently, the consent of all property owners in a development is required for redevelopment. The Bill seeks to lower this threshold, which Chang believes would force minority owners to give up their property rights against their will. “This forces a minority of owners to relinquish their property rights against their will,” he said. He also expressed disappointment that the debate had taken on racial overtones, emphasizing that the HBA’s opposition is based on legal and ethical grounds rather than race.

Chang further warned that the Bill could lead to gentrification and over-development. He highlighted the potential consequences of replacing low-density housing with high-rise buildings, which would significantly increase the number of residents in the same area. For example, he noted that a five-storey block with 200 owners could be replaced by a high-rise with 3,000 owners on the same plot. “Such densification would strain existing infrastructure beyond capacity,” he said, pointing to potential issues like traffic congestion and overwhelmed public services.

The Push for Equity in Urban Renewal

Critics like Tuan Ibrahim, Hafez, and Chang are not opposed to urban renewal itself but argue that the current Bill fails to protect the rights and interests of vulnerable communities. They call for a more equitable approach to development, one that prioritizes the needs of existing residents over the profits of developers. Tuan Ibrahim, for instance, has stressed the importance of ensuring that urban areas remain inclusive and accessible to all racial and economic groups. “There is no need to introduce a new law for development, what is more important is ensuring that urban demographics are not monopolised by a single race,” he said.

The HBA has proposed alternative solutions to address the challenges of urban renewal without infringing on property rights. Chang suggested that the government could work with developers to offer fair compensation and relocation options for affected residents. He also called for stricter regulations to prevent unchecked densification and ensure that infrastructure can accommodate the increased population. “Imagine a five-storey (block) with 200 owners being replaced by a high-rise with 3,000 owners on the same plot. Such densification would strain existing infrastructure beyond capacity,” he warned.

Balancing Development and People’s Needs

The debate over the Urban Renewal Act highlights the tension between the need for modernization and the rights of existing communities. While urban renewal can bring much-needed improvements to infrastructure and housing, it must be carried out in a way that does not disproportionately harm vulnerable groups. Critics argue that the current Bill fails to strike this balance, prioritizing the interests of developers over those of long-time residents.

Chang Kim Loong has repeatedly emphasized that the HBA is not against redevelopment but believes that it must be done fairly and transparently. He argued that the government should engage in meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders, including homeowners, to ensure that their concerns are addressed. “This forces a minority of owners to relinquish their property rights against their will,” he said, highlighting the need for a more inclusive approach.

As the Bill moves through parliament, the voices of its critics serve as a reminder that urban renewal must be people-centered. The government must carefully consider the potential impact of the legislation on marginalized communities and ensure that their rights are protected. Only then can urban renewal achieve its goal of creating vibrant, inclusive cities for all.