IT is haze season again.

In fact, haze has been an almost yearly affair for Asean countries since the 1980s. It usually happens during the southwest monsoon season between June and September. Its severity depends on how dry and hot the weather is during that particular year and how peat fires are controlled during the season.

In some years, transboundary haze especially in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei have seriously impacted the environment, economy, public health and well-being of the people. Haze incidents can cause the country to lose more than RM 1 billion, including through the impact on tourism and businesses, cost of fire fighting and cloud seeding operations, cancellation of flight schedules and sporting events, cost of public health, destruction of biodiversity and so on.

I have been an advocate for Malaysia to introduce a transboundary haze act (THA) since 2019. This act will enable the government to take action against Malaysian individuals or companies that cause haze in the country regardless of where the burning occurred. Currently, there are no specific Malaysian laws governing this. Singapore, on the other hand, passed such a law in 2014.

After the haze crisis in 2019, the then Energy, Science, Technology and Climate Change Ministry commissioned the Academy of Sciences Malaysia to conduct a study into the legal framework requirements to tackle cross-border pollution and to advise the government on whether such a law could be effective. On February 12, 2020, the Pakatan Harapan cabinet discussed the results of this study and agreed in principle to introduce the law.

Nevertheless, progress was stalled by the subsequent governments after the Sheraton Move. I asked the positions of both the previous Perikatan Nasional government and the current unity government in the Parliament regarding the tabling of THA, both gave a negative answer.

Some may argue that a THA is just a cosmetic move because the evidence of open burning has to be collected in Indonesia. Furthermore, extra-territorial prosecution would be very challenging and requires collaboration with Indonesian authorities, which may not be forthcoming. However, nay-sayers did not realise that THA can also incorporate preventive clauses such as:

1. To compel Malaysian companies at risk of causing haze in Malaysia from abroad to make available satellite data for all their premises such as plantations (to make them accountable for the hotspots detected via satellite).

2. To require companies to declare new land purchases in high-risk areas such as oil palm plantations in Indonesia and declare how the land was cleared before purchase (to prevent the locals from using slash-and-burn methods to clear the land before selling it to big companies).

Greater transparency will serve as a deterrent against Malaysian plantation companies misbehaving in other countries. In addition, it would also help to counter the negative image painted by the developed countries that oil palm plantations are all the same and the main cause of forest burning in the region (or the loss of orangutan habitats as shown in the famous ads). In short, higher transparency will help us differentiate the white sheep from the black, figuratively speaking.

With that, I call upon the government to reconsider the current position and work on introducing a transboundary haze act in Malaysia. – October 5, 2023.

* Yeo Bee Yin is Puchong MP and former energy, science, technology and climate change minister.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.