The Protect Karpal Singh Drive action committee, ProtectKarpal, under the Bandar Sri Pinang Pulau Pinang Residents’ Association, demands that Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow honour his pledge of no further extension to the Jelutong landfill project.
ProtectKarpal also wants him to immediately initiate the termination of the 2020 joint development agreement with the developer and ensure that affected residents participate meaningfully in deciding the landfill’s rehabilitation plan.
On 12 July, Chow publicly declared that if the developer failed to secure approval for the environmental impact assessment within the final stipulated period, no further extension would be granted, and the project would not continue under the company.
On 10 August, the state announced an extension until 18 October. That deadline has now expired without evidence of the required approval.
Yet the Penang state government has neither announced a decision nor explained whether the developer, PLB Engineering Berhad (PLB), fulfilled the stipulated requirements.
A check of the Department of Environment’s EKAS database on 26 October found that PLB’s last environmental impact Assessment submission, received on 18 March, was marked “tidak diluluskan” (not approved). No subsequent submission was recorded.
A telephone enquiry with Penang DoE further confirmed to ProtectKarpal that no new impact assessment had been submitted.
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN), Maybank a/c 507246118995 or CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a regular pledge or periodic auto-donation to Aliran
- Become an Aliran member
Five rejected environmental impact assessment submissions, repeated extensions and an expired deadline demand a decisive response, not further delay.
No more extensions
The chief minister must honour his word. A final deadline cannot be repeatedly redefined to accommodate a developer’s inability to meet regulatory requirements.
This is no longer simply a question of project implementation. It is a test of political credibility, government accountability and public trust.
ProtectKarpal demands that Chow immediately confirm that no further extension has been or will be granted, disclose PLB’s compliance status as at 18 October, and announce the state’s decision.
Reject the 70-acre reclamation
ProtectKarpal demands that the state government immediately initiate lawful termination of the joint development agreement, rather than prolong an agreement whose implementation has repeatedly failed to obtain environmental approval.
Clause 18.1 of the agreement – obtained by ProtectKarpal through a freedom-of-information appeal – provides for termination with not less than 30 days’ notice where the state considers it necessary in the state interest, for state security, or for state government policy or public policy.
Clause 18.2 assigns the determination of these grounds to the state government.
The state has an express contractual option to terminate. It must now exercise that option in the public interest, issue the required notice without delay, and disclose any legal or financial implications.
The proposed 70-acre coastal reclamation raises further questions about the project’s contractual justification. Clause 1.1.1 defines the purpose of any approved “additional area” as securing the perimeter for rehabilitation work only. It does not confer an automatic right to reclaim 70 acres.
At the signing of the joint development agreement in February 2020, Chow described reclamation of up to 10 acres for embankment and perimeter-wall work.
The 2025 environmental impact assessment subsequently proposed 70 acres -seven times that figure.
ProtectKarpal’s examination of the assessment indicates that almost the entire proposed reclamation area would accommodate processing and recycling of excavated landfill waste, rather than perimeter protection. The need to process landfill waste cannot, by itself, justify reclaiming 70 acres of coastal waters.
The state must reject the proposed reclamation and publish the complete joint development agreement, including supplementary agreements, extension letters and engineering assessments justifying the additional land.
Residents must have a say
The recent fatal landslide at Taman Seri Rambai in Paya Terubong, which claimed a doctor’s life, is a tragic reminder of what is at stake when residents’ concerns about development risks are not adequately addressed.
As reported on 27 October, residents had raised repeated warnings about hillside development, rock blasting, mudflows and neighbourhood safety for more than a decade. Yet their concerns remained unresolved, and tragedy has now struck.
While the precise causes of the landslide require independent investigation, the lesson for Jelutong is clear: residents’ lived experiences and local knowledge must be treated as essential evidence in environmental decision-making, not dismissed as obstacles to development.
Those living near the Jelutong landfill understand its environmental consequences firsthand and will bear the long-term risks of any rehabilitation plan.
They must therefore be directly involved from the outset in evaluating alternatives, assessing environmental and health risks, and determining the rehabilitation approach.
Public participation is not a favour granted by the government; it is a fundamental safeguard against decisions that may endanger communities. We must not wait for another tragedy before listening to residents.
For decades, residents of Bandar Sri Pinang, Jelutong, and surrounding communities have lived with the landfill’s environmental consequences. Their health, living environment and neighbourhoods are directly affected by decisions about its future.
Those who bear the consequences must have a meaningful voice in deciding the solutions. ProtectKarpal therefore demands that the state urgently establish a transparent, inclusive and formal mechanism for residents to participate in formulating a new rehabilitation plan.
Residents must be involved from the outset in identifying priorities, evaluating alternative rehabilitation methods, assessing environmental and public health risks, and determining the site’s future use.
The state should commission an independent assessment of alternatives, prioritising rehabilitation within the existing landfill footprint while minimising marine disturbance.
All relevant environmental studies, technical assessments and rehabilitation proposals must be disclosed to residents before decisions are finalised.
Public participation must go beyond consultation after decisions have already been made. Residents must be partners in shaping the rehabilitation plan, not passive recipients of decisions imposed upon them.
Action, not another extension
ProtectKarpal demands three immediate actions:
- Honour the 18 October deadline without further extension.
- Initiate the termination of the joint development agreement and reject the 70-acre reclamation
- Establish meaningful residents’ participation in deciding the rehabilitation plan.
The chief minister must now demonstrate that government commitments have meaning and that public interest takes precedence over prolonged commercial arrangements.
No more extensions. Terminate the agreememt. Let residents decide their future. – ProtectKarpal
The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.
- Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
- Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
- Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
- Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
- Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
