I am referring to the article authored by Mak Khuin Weng, ‘Is PKNS field Pakatan crooked bridge?’, published by Malaysiakini on April 11, 2015, and the article written by R Nadeswaran in his column, Citizen Nades, entitled ‘Lift the lid on govt land deals’, published by the Sun on April 15, 2015, both of which had touched on the public hearing conducted by the Selangor Special Select Committee on Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) inquiring into the change of zone for the PKNS field in Kelana Jaya.

As both the authors had made serious mistakes in the facts for which the wrong inferences were inevitably drawn, I see it appropriate that I write to clarify the matters in one letter which I am doing now.

Mak wrote in his article that, “During a public hearing by the Select Committee on Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat), MBPJ town planning senior assistant director Faiwos Abd Hamid admitted that she implemented the changes to RTPJ2 on the instructions of her then-town planning director Noraini Roslan.

“Instead of investigating further on the conduct of Noraini Roslan, she was promoted to the position of Kuala Selangor district council yang di-pertua.

“No one was found guilty and the case was closed by then Selcat chairperson Teng Chang Khim with the declaration that the field would not be developed.”

Nadeswaran in his article also said almost the same thing as follows:-

“The ‘confession’ at the hearing made everyone sit up and wonder how MBPJ conducts its affairs. Its assistant director in the Town Planning Department Faiwos Abd Hamid charged that she made changes to the local plan on the instructions of her then-boss Noraini Rosland.

“Subsequently, instead of being censured, Noraini was promoted to head the Kuala Selangor district council - which has been the norm in a system where anyone and everyone gets rewarded for dereliction of duties.”

Based on the erroneous facts and chronology, both the author suggested and concluded, in their respective styles, that:-

1. At the public hearing of Selcat, Noraini Roslan was pinpointed by Faiwos Abd Hamid as the person who gave the instruction that changes be made to the zoning of PKNS field; and

2. Noraini was the culprit and in spite of that and instead of being censured or further investigated, she was promoted by Selcat.

Let me refer to the Selcat Report. The Selcat Report on the public hearing inquiring into the matter, as approved and adopted by the Selangor state assembly, did not find it as a fact that Faiwos pinpointed Noraini.

The report stated that Selcat found that none of the witnesses was prepared to admit that he or she was the one who gave instruction to make the changes to the local plan and that they only stated that they were either following practices, taking the spirit of the comment by the menteri besar, collectively agreeing or continuing with the work to make the amendments carried out together with the Town and Country Planning Department. This is their first mistake.

Secondly, even if Noraini was found responsible at the hearing, it is wholly untrue to say that despite being found responsible, instead of being further investigated or censured, she was promoted by Selcat.

The fact is, the Selcat public hearing was held for three days on 27, 28 June and July 5, 2012 but Noraini was promoted on July 1, 2011, one year before the public hearing. In other words, even if she was found guilty, it was one year after her promotion and therefore it was not true to say that despite found guilty, she was promoted. This is their second mistake.

Misconceived or malicious?

Thirdly, by accusing Selcat of promoting Noraini, the authors were either having a misconceived understanding of our system of three-branch government or being malicious. Noraini is a civil servant under the purview of the executive and Selcat is a House committee of the legislature which has no power or jurisdiction over the civil servants on disciplinary matter.

Fourthly, Mak had further stated that I, being the then chairperson of Selcat, closed the case with no one found guilty. Mak must have been mischievously ignorant. He must have had intentionally forgotten that there were seven members in Selcat and the findings of Selcat in its report were the conclusion of the seven members after due deliberation and not mine alone, presented to the Assembly weeks after the public hearing.

How could I have had covered up the case single-handedly?

Fifthly, although Selcat was unable to single out who was responsible for the change of the local plan, it had categorically pronounced that the officers in the Development Planning Department of the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) were reckless, incompetent and unprofessional. This means those officers involved were found ‘guilty’.

For further investigation and disciplinary action, it is the duty of the executive and not of the Selcat. The author had again displayed his utter ignorance of the system when he threw his accusation against me personally.

Another point, by the way, is that Selcat in the report had also unambiguously pronounced that the PKNS land was still designated as a recreational zone and open space under the local plan.

Section 18 of the Town and Country Planning Act expressly prohibits the use of land or building for purposes not in accordance with the local plan. As such, despite the wish or the predicament of the landowner, the land cannot be approved for any development under the said law.

Finally, I expect a public apology from the authors, especially Mak who had cast aspersion on me personally, as the articles were publicly published.

TENG CHANG KHIM is a member of the Selangor exco and former speaker of the state assembly.