Bukit Antarabangsa Tragedy - Hillslope Development

My deepest sympathy and condolence to the victims of the Bukit Antarabangsa tragedy.

The latest Bukit Antarabangsa Tragedy in Kuala Lumpur once again demonstrates the Malaysian boleh for the wrong reason.

Landslide in the vicinity of Bukit Antarabangsa is not alien to us. It is a tragedy that occurs with such frequency that we have to ask ourselves whether we are wiser after each disaster. We may be sad, but are we any wiser?

The usual blame game will start and new directives have been issued by the PM to state government and local council. This will be repeated when the next tragedy strikes again.

Hillslope development and landslide tragedy is a classic example of greed, inefficiency in implementation and poor monitoring or to be exact no monitoring.

There are clear guidelines for hillslope developments. There is also a cabinet committee on hillslope development with very clear guidelines according to the gradients of the hillslopes and measures to be undertaken. Often this remains good only on paper.

There are some issues that need to be taken in consideration for hillslope development.

1. Are projects approved according to guidelines in high-risk hillslope Development?

2. Are there any measures to stabilize the hillslope implemented?

3. Who is the monitoring authority? A coordinated approach involving JKR, DOE, JPS, local council and geotechnical experts are required.

4 When the project is completed, who is responsible for monitoring the hillslope stability?

5. What about the professional consultants (from engineers to architects) – are they also not liable, can they be sued so that there are more professionalism and commitment in their work?

I have written many times in this blog that EIA Report and other mitigating measures remain good on papers only since there is hardly any effective monitoring and enforcement.

We should learn from Hong Kong how they overcome their problem on Hillslopes development. There is a need to review all hillslope development that have been approved but not implemented and revisit some of the completed projects.

Political will is required. Meanwhile, there should not be any cutting of trees and vegetations on hillslopes that are earmarked for development. Buyers should be more demanding and discerning about purchasing houses on hillslopes. Panoramic view and fresh air is good if there is soil and slope stability.

首先，我要对在国际山庄土崩灾难中罹难者的家属致以深切的慰问。

最近发生在淡江的严重土崩事件再次凸显出“马来西亚能”是一项讽刺。

我们不会对国际山庄发生土崩感到陌生；对于如此频密发生的灾难，我们是否应该扪心自问，每一次发生灾难后，我们会难过，但是可有醒悟？

一如过去，灾难发生后出现谴责声浪，首相也已经向州政府及地方议会发出新指示。

然而，当日后再发生同样的灾难时，会重复同样的情节。

山坡地区发展及土崩灾难凸显贪婪、执法无效率及拙劣监管，甚至是完全没有监管的经典实例。

事实上，山坡地区发展是有明确的指南，而且内阁也成立一个委员会，并根据山坡的斜度拟定指南，同时也阐明所需采取所有措施，但这一切只沦为纸上谈兵。

山坡发展需要进行以下考量：
1. 是否根据高风险山坡发展指南去审核有关发展计划？
2.是否有进行任何稳定坡面的措施？
3.谁是监管机构？工程局、环境局、水利灌溉局、地方政府及地质专家应该互相协调。
4.当发展计划竣工，谁负责监管山坡环境稳定？
5.专业人士（工程师至建筑师）又如何？他们是否需要负责法律责任？从而确保这些专业人士的工作更专业及负责精神。

我曾在这里多次提及，环境评估报告及其他调和的措施只是纸上谈兵，因为这期间几乎没有进行严厉的监管及执法。

我们应该向香港学习，从而了解他们是如何解决山坡地区发展的问题。同时，也需要检讨所有已经获得批准但还没有进行的山坡发展计划，并重新视查部分已经竣工的计划。

政治意愿是必要的。但不应该为了要发展而砍伐山坡树木及植物。购屋者方面，有意购买山坡房屋的人士要更谨慎及苛刻选择。当然，如果土壤及坡面稳定，绿意盎然的景色及新鲜空气是大家都喜爱的。