Massive landslide at Bukit Antarabangsa,
14 banglo tertimbus tanah runtuh di Bukit Antarabangsa
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 6 — Three people, including a mother and her two-month-old baby, have been confirmed dead in a massive landslide in Bukit Antarabangsa early today.
Police also said eight others are missing and 15 injured in the 4am landslide that swept and buried 14 houses in Jalan Bukit Mewah and Jalan Mewah Utama.
The injured and the remains of the dead have been rushed to the Kuala Lumpur Hospital.
Some 160 personnel from the police, army, Ampang Jaya Municipal Council and medical personnel are involved in the ongoing search and rescue operation.
The landslide happened near the Highland Towers tragedy just five days shy of 15 years ago that killed 48 people when Tower One collapsed.
Extract from The Malaysian InsiderThe PM reacted "This would incur the wrath of developers and individual land owners but enough is enough,” he told reporters after visiting the landslide-hit areas on Saturday afternoon.
Read PM: 'Enough is enough, stop the hillside projects'
View Pics of the incident at Paneh Miang's blog here
Updated 8.42 pm
By the way according to the Federal Court rulings in the Highland Towers case, municipal councils shall not be liable for the losses incurred to anyone should a building collapse. The court ruled that they have blanket immunity under Section 95 (2) of the Street, Drainage & Building Act 1974 (Act 133) from claims and liabilities whether from the pre-collapse or post-collapse period. One of the reasoning given was that if the local councils were made liable, it would open the floodgates to further claims for economic loss, and this would deplete the council’s resources meant for the provision of basic services and infrastructure. The usual public versus private interests issue.
Now, what if there is negligence on the part of any municipal councils? Should they be allowed to hide behind section 95 (2)?
Section 95 (2) of the Street, Drainage & Building Act 1974 reads;
"The State Authority, local authority and any public officer or officer or employee of the local authority shall not be subject to any action, claim, liabilities or demand whatsoever arising out of any building or other works carried out in accordance with the provision of this Act and any by-laws made thereunder or by reason of the fact that such building works or plans thereof are subject to inspection and approval by the State Authority, local authority, or such public officer or officer or employee of the State Authority or the local authority and nothing in this Act or any by-laws made thereunder shall make it obligatory for the State Authority of the local authority to inspect any building, building works or materials or the site of any proposed building to ascertain that that the provisions of this Act or any by-laws made thereunder are complied with of that plans ,certificates and notices submitted to him are accurate."
A time has come for the authorities concerned to review the law perhaps?
Read also RantingsbyMM's How's This for Sensitivity?