KL Land Development System – MACC Needs to Do More

The recent article in The Edge CEO Morning Brief (26 August 2025), “PAC calls for overhaul of KL land development system over unchecked approvals, ignored public objections and cheap land sales,” sheds light on a troubling state of affairs. The findings of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on land development in Kuala Lumpur raise fundamental questions about governance, accountability, and the very integrity of our planning system.

At the heart of the problem lies the violation of the Kuala Lumpur Local Plan. Cancellations of gazetted public reserves and green spaces have paved the way for uncontrolled development. Worse, applications by government departments themselves have been rejected while approvals for high-density projects in green areas were granted. The consequences are clear: weakened trust, reduced quality of life, and an erosion of sustainability commitments.

Under the Federal Capital Act 1960 and the Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982, the mayor wields full authority over development decisions. Stakeholder engagement has become mere formality. We need not look far for examples, the Kampung Bohol Retention Pond and Taman Rimba Kiara sagas highlight how public voices are sidelined in favor of expedient approvals.

Systemic Weaknesses That Must Not Be Ignored

The PAC also revealed that land premiums have been undervalued for decades due to an outdated 30-year-old formula. This has led to significant revenue leakages, losses borne not by faceless entities, but by the people. Compounding the issue is the “secret” gazettement of the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur Planning Rules 2025, which makes consultations with technical agencies and stakeholders optional. Such moves directly contravene the Federal Territories Planning Act and disregard the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 10, 11, and 17, inclusivity, public participation, and partnerships.

This sets a dangerous precedent. It signals that while the government preaches good governance, the machinery of decision-making continues to operate in opaque, exclusive, and potentially self-serving ways.

Where Is the Accountability?

The PAC has summoned key figures, including a former Federal Territories minister, a former Chief Secretary to the Government, and a former mayor. Yet, mere inquiries and reports will not suffice. Ministers must be reminded: they are individually accountable to Parliament. A simple instruction to “evaluate PAC recommendations” is inadequate. Accountability requires tangible corrective measures, and, where necessary, punitive actions.

Meanwhile, the proposed Urban Redevelopment Act (URA) must also be approached with extreme caution. Vesting sweeping powers in a single authority without robust oversight is a recipe for abuse. The identification of 139 redevelopment sites in KL with a gross development value exceeding RM335 billion must be reviewed in light of undervalued government land.

MACC Must Step Up

While it is commendable that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has taken steps, such as the arrest of a senior DBKL officer for alleged decade-long corruption, this is only the tip of the iceberg. The PAC findings point to systemic issues that go beyond individual misconduct. The MACC must widen its investigations to cover undervaluation practices, questionable approvals, and the erosion of public consultation processes.

Integrity Is Not a Slogan

Integrity, transparency, and governance cannot remain buzzwords. They must translate into action. Civil servants and policymakers alike must internalise these values, remembering that their mandate is to serve the rakyat, not personal or vested interests.

The stakes are high. Kuala Lumpur is not just a city, it is the capital and symbol of Malaysia. How its land is developed reflects the nation’s commitment to sustainability, fairness, and justice. Without reform, accountability, and a genuine embrace of transparency, we risk perpetuating a system that enriches the few while eroding public trust and undermining long-term national interests.

What say you?

Saleh Mohammed