My last column argued – premised upon the Athi Nahappan Royal Commission Report – that increased and improved accountability at the local government level, through the election of mayors, is one sure and clear way to move towards better governance at the city level – and later towards all municipal council levels.

Although Petaling Jaya has been a city for a few years now, even under the Pakatan government, the only real effects of systems improvement noticed within the lived space – or at governmental level – are changes related to state-level abuse by former systems of procurement related to rubbish clearance, or maintenance of drains and water flows, or even the upkeep of green spaces.

These have mostly been decentralised to independent suppliers of such services.

Nonetheless, Selangor has passed a Freedom of Information Act which promises improvements in knowledge and information dissemination to residents about all developments in the state. But, up till now, this promise of transparency and openness remains slightly more than a promise.

For example, I went to the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) Public Relations Department and requested for forms about how to file for information related to seven plots of lands which I deemed to have been “stolen from the residents and citizens”, but they could not help me.

Believe it or not, their department did not even know of the Freedom of Information Act or procedures on how I could secure such information about projects in my neighbourhood. I have since found out that it is a cumbersome process which requires payment for such information, although the amount is minimal.

Therefore – as the substance of my complaints related to possible corruption and abuse of authority at the level of the district office – I decided to formally complain to the Selangor speaker, since the then menteri besar had been too busy to give me an informative reply regarding the same but earlier enquiry.

To the credit of Subang Jaya residents who elected Hannah Yeoh, she replied in the positive and asked my team to present the complaint to a state senate committee chaired by Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, the then deputy speaker.

Personal civil protest

We have done so last year, with photographic evidence of all seven stolen public lands and a requisite to know what really happened to our public spaces – that they can be abused at will by crooks and cronies working closely with formal systems.

We are still waiting to hear from the state authorities. In the meantime, I have written and asserted to the MBPJ mayor that I will refuse to pay the \’cukai taksiran\’ or assessment for our property because of their non-action regarding such public theft.

This is my personal civil protest for theft of public property, which has been well-established by the Select Committee on Competence, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) years ago, as a matter of illegality.

My reason for doing so is simple: It cannot be that MBPJ officials – who are paid salaries from our assessments – are working with crooks and cronies to help them steal and hijack public lands which were implicitly part and parcel of what we paid for when we originally bought the houses.

I have all requisite records and will be prepared to defend myself, if and when, MBPJ takes me to court when they seek to impound my property because of my non-payment of assessment. The amount is a meagre RM813.12, but mine is a just cause protest.

As an ex-government servant who served without fuss or fanfare and did most of my jobs faithfully, I cannot accept that public servants of today serve only their self-interest and the interest of those who are morally corrupt, when it concerns the public\’s well-being – especially to favour crooks and cronies.

Moderate, middle-class Malaysians, have to begin to say \”No!\” to all such activities related to cronies and corruption. Symptoms of moral corruption are an early warning signal about potential financial or political corruption

And, given that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) currently sees no wrong with moral or political corruption – or is, in fact, not even geared to handle such cases – where does an ordinary citizen turn to for such complaints? Mine is such a protest for the lack of integrity in this corrupt system.

As prime minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had established the Integrity Institute of Malaysia (IIM). The first IIM president is a good friend, and he participated in an Oriental Hearts and Minds Study Institute (OHMSI) forum against bribery and corruption, or what I have always labelled as \’ABC for Malaysia\’. 

It is now, therefore, the right time for ordinary Malaysians in all walks of life and in all municipalities to demand and insist upon improved governance at all the local levels. Why should we still tolerate incompetence and corruption after 57 years of independence?

Left out of the loop

By now, in Malaysia, about 80 percent of all Malaysians already live within municipal authorities, and therefore are beginning to pay assessments, or what is called \”local taxes\” for ownership of local property. Not to mention, by April this year we will all be paying the goods and services tax (GST).

Furthermore, in many residential locations, private security arrangements have been incurred with local payments, and there has been much abuse of our roads being closed for security, as defined by these locals.

The local municipality is completely left out of the loop over such arrangements. How can that be?

Why, then, do local authorities require that “all approved development projects place notice boards to inform the local neighbourhood about these activities\”?

It is simply so that all neighbours can be assured that these projects for development will not spoil or harm the local environment, both in physical and metaphorical forms.

But, should not these notice boards say more, without residents always having to ask for more information? Several questions that go through my mind are:

  • Who defined this as a development project? Who was awarded this contract? Was it an open process of bidding for cost effectiveness?

What activities are required to be carried out? Assuming that the MBPJ has no time to monitor all such projects in the city, should not residents be recruited to do the same?By when must all these activities be carried out? Are there timelines and dates for completion?What are the full implications if these project activities are not done well? Or, in a more positive way, what and how will residents be served by the development project, to improve the quality of our lived environment?Am I simply being too demanding, or ambitious, or simply an irritant?