The Case with Conversion of Public Area to Gated and Guarded Community

Gated and Guarded Community
Tuesday, 1 December, 2009 11:11 PM
From: "ng boonhong"
To: usj2gng@gmail.com, alanchuah@gmail.com, christie@gmail.com
Cc: hannahyeoh@dapsj.com, mpsj@mpsj.gov.my, rajiv@dapsj.com

Dear All,
I am a resident of USj2 and write, on behalf of a few residents in USJ 2, to offer our humble opinion on the proposal for a GnG community in USJ2.

Firstly, we would like to record our appreciation and thanks to the Committee of USJ2 RA for the commendable effort in trying to ensure a secure and safe environment for residents in USJ2. It is also heartening to note that generally the residents are concerned with the security problem in the area.

We are in favour of viable measures to improve safety and security in USJ2. The proposal for a GnG community in USJ2, on the surface, looks attractive. However, there are concerns that the implementation may have legal and practical implications that merit in-depth considerations.

Some of these are :
1. The project may be unlawful. The roads in USJ2 are public places and it is unlawful to prevent/restrain members of the public from having free and unrestraint lawful movement/access. The mere act of stopping vehicles, erecting barriers, diverting traffic and recording particulars of persons wanting access into the area, to my mind, constitutes "restrain". Only the Police and some relevant authorities are empowered by law to conduct such activities for purposes of security, maintenance of public order and traffic management. The security guards are not vested with such powers ;

2. It is said that the local authorities, in this case the MPSJ, can approve the project if substantial number of residents ( 75% - 80 % ) agree to it. We would greatly appreciate if we could be enlightened on the provisions of the Law or Regulation authorising MPSJ to act as such and also whether or not this Law or Regulation, if any, are ultra vires the Federal Constitution which guarantees lawful free movement.

3. If the project is unlawful, who will bear the consequences of any litigation that may arise from any untoward incidents or challenge. The USJ2 RA Committee needs to be protected from this eventuality.

4. The infra-structures in USJ are unique ( unlike other housing schemes in USJ ) and affect practical implementation of the GnG project. Two schools and a mosque are located in the middle of USJ2. The area is flanked by Jalan Kewajipan and Jalan Tujuan - two of the busiest roads in USJ/Subang Jaya. There are six entry points into USJ2, a pedestrian crossing from USJ2 to SS 14 Subang Jaya, two petrol stations and two rows of low-cost shop lots. Implementation of the GnG project will cause inconvenience to movement within USJ2 itself and traffic jams especially during peak hours.

5. It is said that the principals of the 2 schools had agreed to the GnG project. Theirs are only 2 opinions. Have they brought the matter to the attention of the Parents/Teachers Association ? What have the people in areas outside USJ2 who send their children to school got to say ?

6. Sad to say, it would appear that the residents have to fend for themselves to ensure their safety and security. To many, this appears to be an Abdication of Responsibilities by the proper authorities. In particular, it does not speak well for the Police. For this reason too they do not support the GnG project.

7. This is a project to be funded by voluntary contributions by the residents and is not bound by any agreement. Many may choose not to contribute. There are also those who may eventually withdraw support if, by and by, they consider the required cost and monthly maintenance too high. In this eventuality, the project may collapse.

The concerns enumerated above represent the reasons why some residents are not in agreement with the implementation of the GnG project. It is presented in good faith and not intended to undermine support for the project. As pointed out earlier, we are all in favour of viable measures to improve security and safety in USJ.

In the meantime, in view of the high crime rate ( not including those that go unreported ), representation needs to be made to the Police to conduct and maintain "high visibilty patrols" in our area.

To my mind, the following are some measures requiring study/consideration as viable alternatives :

1. In most cases, house breaking were through the back doors. MPSJ should consider allowing construction of gates to prevent unauthorise entry into the back lanes. I surmise MPSJ objects to this for reason that keys to the gates cannot be readily available in case of emergencies like fire-fighting. Actually, in such eventuality, the gates can be smashed down if keys are not readily available.

2. CCTV coverage of USJ2 with links to Police Station. The cost and maintenance may be high. On the other hand, this may not be so if the project is undertaken with support from Telcos and MPSJ. Telcos may be interested in view of benefits they can derive from such projects.

3.Rukun Tetangga has proved difficult to implement in our area. In lieu of this, we can probably look into the possibility of employing Malaysian citizens as security guards with Auxillary Police powers to conduct patrols and checks. The auxillary Police powers can only be exercised within USJ2 or any area in USJ approved by the IGP. 8 to 10 such personnel working on 8 hourly shifts should suffice.

This email is forwarded in good faith and sincerity in supporting any viable measures to improve safety and security in our community.

Thank you for your attention.
Ng Boon Hong