MOST people might still remember that while people enjoyed and cheered for the success of movement-control order (MCO) 1.0, a lot of positive news related to the environment were reported too.

As I can recall, the decreased level in air pollution in the Klang Valley was among the good news. A record taken from 65 air quality monitoring stations showed that the Air Pollutant Index dipped by 14% to record a clean index.

Besides, water quality also has improved considerably when compared to pre-MCO 1.0. However, all these positive signs were just temporary as we still have some unsettled environmental warnings that showed up during MCO 3.0.

More environmental warning signs

The recent Gunung Jerai flash flood claimed six lives and 1,000 homes were affected in Yan and Merbok in Kuala Muda. This is one of the warning signs in Peninsular Malaysia.

Meanwhile, in East Malaysia, another warning sign is the river logjam and floating debris along Sg Baleh, Kapit, in Sarawak.

Upon closer scrutiny, these two recent incidents are related to forests and human intervention in the name of development or economic returns. So, why is that a problem?

Often the environmentalists warn that deforestation and climate change are pushed to a tipping point beyond which we will see human activities actually release more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than the forest can capture.

Consequently, it will raise global temperatures and cause climate change that will bring unexpected extreme weather that impacts the whole world as well as affects lives, economies and nation-states.

At global level, we do have the international governmental panel on climate change (IPCC) reports, Kyoto Protocol, Paris Agreement and other environment-related agreements as safeguards to monitor closely on environmental issues.

Malaysia has its own safeguards in laws and regulations. Yet, many environmental laws in Malaysia were developed way back in the 1960s (eg, Land Conservation Act 1960; Sabah Animal Ordinance 1962; Radioactive Substance Act 1968; and Sarawak Forest Ordinance 1954).

The Environmental Quality Act is one of the most frequently cited in the news and it came into force in 1975.

With these laws in place, Malaysia has committed to control industrial pollution, including waste water, air pollution from factories and solid waste problems. These laws apply to the whole of Malaysia.

In addition, to prevent the reserved forest from being degazetted too leniently and too conveniently by the states (until they abuse their power), we have the National Forestry Act (Adoption) Enactment 1985. So, why do problems persist?

Different vision and value shared on environmental issues

By right, we should expect the current laws and regulations to be able to prevent severe environmental consequences, but the prerequisite is that all the stakeholders share a similar vision and values on environmental issues.

Based on ground observations, as well as media reports on the recent environmental incidents in Malaysia, it shows that most of the time the authorities did not share the same vision in protecting our forest and environment.

An example is the de-gazetting of the Kuala Langat North Forest Reserve (KLNFR) for a mixed development project in Selangor.

Despite ongoing protests since the project announcement, the Selangor government is adamant that it is a proposal still under discussion and they are examining the views from relevant experts.

Meanwhile, in the recent Gunung Jerai incident, we saw the authorities easily dismissing the warning signs, viewing it merely as an act of God.

Another similar example in East Malaysia, is the recalling of the water dam project in Sabah. Regardless of which political camp is in power, the state government often prefers using the previous government’s report to justify the need for the Papar dam project.

The similarity in the statements from both the infrastructure development ministers from opposing sides of the political divide reveal the discord between government and the affected stakeholders:

“Kaiduan dam will ensure sufficient water supply to Kota Kinabalu and its vicinity until the year 2050,” said Raymond Tan, the former minister of infrastructure development, in May 2009.

“If we do not build this dam, the water woes along the west coast of Sabah will not be resolved,” said Peter Anthony, the minister of infrastructure development in June 2019.

It is terrifying that the projects announced thus far have not gone through the consultation process at community level and the affected villagers are very disillusioned with the state government statements.

This also means that some loopholes found in the existing environmental laws mean legislation fails to act as a safeguard or be enforced adequately.

In this context, the prominent environmental group Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) recently remarked that the Gunung Jerai incident must be related to forest cutting and tree clearing, and not due to licensed logging activities, as asserted by Kedah Menteri Besar Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor.

The deluge of water with mud seen in many videos of the incident clearly shows the evidence of land clearing, otherwise mud would have been largely held by the trees.

Another important note is that Gunung Jerai is a reserved forest in Kedah. Therefore, an environmentally sensitive area as such should not have any tree clearing.

Some hope in the dark

Compared to the state response and attitude toward the Gunung Jerai incident, the Sg Baleh incident is more positive and perhaps similar vision is shared between the authorities and the environmentalists.

Few days after the incident, it was confirmed by the Sarawak Forestry Department that this incident was caused by the accumulation of wood debris at Baled Hydroelectric Power (HEP) dam.

The state said the department will tighten its monitoring measures to ensure that there is no recurrence of the incident.

The state government has also decided to set up a special task force led by the Urban Development and Natural Resources Ministry, consisting of various government departments, agencies and other stakeholders.

Although there might be hope in the Sg Baleh incident, it may well be an isolated case where political will is demonstrated to solve the issue.

It doesn’t mean that all these destructive activities will not happen again in the fragile ecosystem.  

Effective and comprehensive environmental laws should be improved, strengthened and implemented across the whole nation (including land reforms at the state level), as rapid industrialisation and urbanisation will continue to be the main challenges contributing to deforestation in Malaysia and elsewhere in the world.

In short, if ‘business as usual’ continues to be the order of the day, then we will still have to confront the problems that arise from environmental pollution and destruction.

We need to beef up our environmental safeguards and policies to address the issue of de-gazetting forest reserves, while finding the most environmentally sustaining way for development. – August 30, 2021.

* Esther Sinirisan Chong is a member of Agora Society. She was born and raised in the Land Below the Wind. Her research interest lies in education and government policies, and the history and heritage of East Malaysia.