Works minister defends JKR against criticism over deadly UPSI bus crash, calls for focus on service delivery
Works Minister Datuk Seri Alexander Nanta Linggi said the ministry and JKR often face ongoing criticism.
He said such criticism tends to arise during incidents involving public infrastructure and the loss of lives, such as the recent fatal accident that claimed the lives of 15 Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (UPSI) students along the East-West Highway (JRTB) in Gerik, Perak last month.
'We mourn as well, but we are often blamed even when the causes vary depending on the situation... like in the bus accident in Gerik last month, some claimed that the bus overturned and the guardrail pierced through the body of the bus, causing the fatalities.
'... but in reality, the bus was speeding and overturned, landing on the guardrail. This is the actual fact that the public may not know or has been twisted to make it seem as though the guardrail itself was highly dangerous. While there may indeed be some danger in the current design, alternative designs have not yet been implemented. So we will review other design options later,' he said.
He said this after officiating the 2025 Senior Officers Conference (SOC) for JKR Malaysia here today.
Also present were Deputy Works Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Maslan, JKR Director-General Datuk Roslan Ismail, and Terengganu JKR director Ir Dr Hasli Ibrahim.
Nanta added that despite swift response and mitigation measures taken by JKR, certain issues and complaints, especially involving roads, continue to be sensationalised or used as 'ammunition' by netizens.
Therefore, he called on all JKR personnel to rise above the criticism and continue to prove their worth to the public by delivering services with full dedication and transparency in order to dispel all accusations.
Some 400 senior JKR officers from across the country, including top management, district engineers, and cadre officers, are attending the three-day SOC 2025 conference beginning today.
Themed 'JKR Mampan: Memacu Kelestarian Madani', the annual conference serves as a platform for critical thinking and unity among senior JKR officers aimed at improving service delivery in a sustainable and holistic manner. — Bernama
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Free Malaysia Today
an hour ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Govt to decide on Sabah's 40% revenue entitlement on Sept 12, says Fadillah
Deputy prime minister Fadillah Yusof said the proposal, submitted by the Sabah government, is based on Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution. (Bernama pic) PETALING JAYA : The federal government will decide on Sabah's proposal to reclaim a 40% net revenue entitlement at the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) meeting scheduled for Sept 12, says deputy prime minister Fadillah Yusof. He said the proposal, submitted by the state government, is based on Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution and will be brought to the prime minister's attention at the meeting, Sabah Media reported. Fadillah, who chaired a special MA63 technical committee meeting in Kota Kinabalu today, said the session was focussed on Sabah's constitutional revenue claims and possible interim solutions. 'We've heard the presentations and proposed solutions from the Sabah government. These proposals have also received feedback from the finance ministry and the Attorney-General's Chambers at the federal level,' he was quoted as saying. Fadillah also acknowledged the ongoing challenge by the Sabah Law Society, which may have legal implications. 'Therefore, we must proceed cautiously, but our goal is to reach a mutually agreed solution outside of court,' he said. Asked whether a final decision could be expected before Malaysia Day, he did not give any confirmation but reiterated that the federal-level meeting was already fixed for Sept 12. The revenue sharing formula has been a contentious issue for decades. Sabah politicians have called for the federal government to honour the state's entitlement to 40% of the amount which exceeds the net revenue derived in 1963. Use of the formula has been suspended since 1974, with the federal government paying increased special grants to Sabah and Sarawak.
Free Malaysia Today
an hour ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Manufactured outrage over judicial appointments: a case of selective memory
From Apandi Ali It is laughable, if not deeply ironic, that a group of MPs, the Malaysian Bar, and civil society figures are now calling for a royal commission of inquiry, petitioning the prime minister and organising walks for justice and public forums all because they fear the prime minister may appoint senior judges without strictly following the names recommended by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). Even more amusing is their insistence that the top judicial vacancies must be urgently filled despite the fact that no legal or constitutional deadline mandates immediate appointment. Let's be clear: this hysteria is entirely based on a hypothetical scenario, one that has not even materialised. According to Section 27 of the JAC Act, the prime minister is perfectly entitled to request two more names for any judicial vacancy, including the offices of the chief justice, president of the Court of Appeal, and other top positions. The law allows room for executive discretion in such appointments. Section 27, titled 'Request for further selection by the prime minister', says the 'prime minister may, after receiving the report under Section 26, request for two more names to be selected and recommended for his consideration'. Even former Court of Appeal judges – the late Gopal Sri Ram, Hishamudin Yunus, and Mah Weng Kwai – publicly stated that the prime minister is not bound to accept the JAC's recommendations. In 2018, they noted that the Federal Constitution, being the supreme law, overrides the JAC Act. Mah, for example, plainly said: 'The JAC makes recommendations to the prime minister, who may decide not to agree with the proposals.' Where are these same voices now, when the media circus rages over a potential decision that has not even been made? The deafening silence over real violations What makes this sudden outrage even more disingenuous is the utter silence over actual, proven breaches of the JAC Act and the Federal Constitution. These are not speculative concerns, but documented in the government-declassified special task force (STF) report on allegations made by former attorney-general Tommy Thomas in his book 'My Story: Justice in the Wilderness'. This STF was approved by the Cabinet on Dec 22, 2021 and comprised respected legal experts, including Fong Joo Chung as the chair besides members Hashim Paijan, Junaidah Kamarruddin, Jagjit Singh, Shaharudin Ali, Balaguru Karuppiah, Farah Adura Hamidi, and Najib Surip. The report uncovered staggering facts. In July 2018, the names appointed to the highest judicial offices – Richard Malanjum as chief justice, Ahmad Maarop and Zaharah Ibrahim as Court of Appeal president and David Wong Dak Wah as chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak — were not those selected by the JAC in its meeting on May 24, 2018. Instead, they were names privately agreed upon between then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and attorney-general Tommy Thomas, bypassing the mandatory processes. The JAC's recommended names on May 24, 2018 were Azahar Mohamed for chief justice, Rohana Yusuf for Court of Appeal president, and Abdul Rahman Sebli for chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak. Yet, these names were discarded, and there was no evidence that Mahathir ever requested additional names under Section 27 of the JAC Act as required. According to the STF report: 'If the prime minister disagreed with the above selection and recommendation of the JAC, pursuant to Section 27 of the JAC Act, he should have requested for more names for each of the vacant judicial positions. There is no evidence before the STF that he had made such a request. 'Instead, from the report of Bahagian Kabinet, Perlembagaan dan Perhubungan Antara Kerajaan, the names submitted by the prime minister when he tendered his advice to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong under Article 122B were the names discussed and agreed upon between the prime minister and attorney-general.' Worse, the STF found that no consultation was held with the chief ministers of Sabah and Sarawak before appointing Wong as chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak – a direct violation of Article 122B(3) of the Federal Constitution. This wasn't merely an administrative oversight, but a constitutional breach. The same pattern emerged in 2019, when the JAC in its meeting on Jan 17, 2019 initially selected Ahmad for chief justice, Wong for Court of Appeal president and Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat for chief judge of the High Court in Malaya. After the prime minister requested two additional names, the JAC in its meeting on April 5, 2019 revised its list and put forward these names: Tengku Maimun and Azahar for chief justice Azahar and Rohana for Court of Appeal president Rohana and Azahar for chief judge of the High Court in Malaya The final names eventually accepted were Tengku Maimun as chief justice (despite being junior), Rohana as Court of Appeal president, and Azahar as chief judge of Malaya. Again, the irony is thick. Those who now cry foul over possible junior appointments were silent – if not supportive – when Tengku Maimun, a comparatively junior judge at the time, was appointed chief justice. Where was the outrage then? A convenient crusade for 'judicial integrity'? It is even more comical that Mahathir – the very person who subverted the JAC process in 2018 and 2019 – is now positioning himself and his allies as the guardians of judicial independence. Even some lawyers today are openly rooting for a specific candidate to be appointed chief justice, undermining their own calls for neutrality and due process. This hypocrisy recalls the cautionary words of former chief justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad, who once criticised proposals by Zaid Ibrahim in 2008 (then minister in the Prime Minister's Department) to create a JAC dominated by practising lawyers. He warned that it would 'give these lawyers an unfair advantage besides damaging the integrity of the court. Judges will kneel to the lawyers!' And now, that prophecy seems to be unfolding before our eyes with segments of the legal fraternity actively lobbying for appointments while masquerading as defenders of institutional integrity. Enough with the double standards The selective outrage over potential breaches, while real violations are ignored, exposes a deeper rot in Malaysia's legal-political culture. This isn't about upholding the law. It's about political convenience, power struggles and self-interest, all disguised under the banner of judicial independence. If the Malaysian Bar, civil society, and opposition leaders are truly serious about reform, they must first reckon with the past violations which they so conveniently ignored. Until then, their cries ring hollow. Let the law be applied consistently, not only when it suits political narratives. Apandi Ali is a former attorney-general and Federal Court judge. The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.
The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
Malaysia and New Zealand strengthen ties in sustainability, digital, and food security
AUCKLAND: Malaysia has outlined three priority areas to deepen cooperation with New Zealand, focusing on sustainability, digital transformation, and food security. Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi emphasised the alignment between both nations in advancing green energy, digital innovation, and agri-food trade. Speaking at the ASEAN-New Zealand Business Council (ANZBC) Engagement, Ahmad Zahid noted New Zealand's leadership in renewable energy, with 87 per cent of its electricity sourced sustainably. 'This aligns closely with Malaysia's commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050,' he said. On digital transformation, he highlighted potential synergies between Malaysia's MyDIGITAL agenda and New Zealand's expertise in ICT, particularly in AI, smart cities, and cybersecurity. 'Collaboration in digital trade governance can drive mutual economic benefits,' he added. In the agri-food sector, Ahmad Zahid pointed to New Zealand's reputation for quality and innovation, complementing Malaysia's halal certification and logistics strengths. 'As ASEAN's middle class grows, this partnership presents vast opportunities,' he said. However, he stressed the need for inclusive growth, ensuring MSMEs in ASEAN and Malaysia benefit from improved trade finance, digital tools, and capacity building. Bilateral trade between Malaysia and New Zealand reached US$2.34 billion (RM10.72 billion) in 2024, making Malaysia New Zealand's second-largest ASEAN trading partner. Ahmad Zahid described the relationship as a 'deep-rooted partnership,' strengthened by agreements like the Malaysia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement and AANZFTA. The ANZBC event, held at Park Hyatt Hotel Auckland, aimed to enhance economic ties and explore trade opportunities between ASEAN and New Zealand. Attendees included ANZBC chairman Kathleen Morrison and New Zealand Trade and Enterprise's Ivy Huang. - Bernama
