Environmental Public Interest Litigation in Malaysia: The New Face

Authors

  • Dalila Amir Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA Pahang, 26400, Jengka, Pahang, MALAYSIA
  • Nurwafa Atikah Mohamad Bahri Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA Pahang, 26400, Jengka, Pahang, MALAYSIA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24191/bioenv.v1i1.23

Keywords:

Public interest litigation, Environmental issues, locus standi, Fundamental rights, Judicial activism

Abstract

Environmental issues gained popularity in these recent years not only at the international level but also on the local Malaysian platform. The awareness of the importance of conserving and preserving the environment keeps increasing since the world is now in an endangered environmental crisis. The clashes between the need for state development and preserving the environment especially faced by developing countries like ours, is a continuous and unsettled battle. Moreover, the victim, the environment, is a silent creature that has no place in the court of law to address its grievances. That is why public interest litigation is the hope for this silent victim. The public should be given the locus standi to address the environmental issues since the matter concerns the interest of the public at large, though not directly affected by the said development. Environmental public interest litigation is not a new subject. However, the development in Malaysia is not very encouraging and is considered the least explored area of public interest litigation since the decision of the Supreme Court in Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang and United Engineers (M) Bhd v Lim Kit Siang [1988] 2 MLJ 12 also known as ‘UEM case’. However, the new hope for the growth and development of environmental public interest litigation emerged after the Malaysian Trade Union Congress & Ors v Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi & Anor [2014] 3 MLJ 145 decided by the Federal Court. It is crucial now for the judges sitting in the upper courts to exercise their judicial activism creatively and wisely. Employing doctrinal and analytical methods, this study aims to contribute to the growth of environmental public interest litigation discussion. Thus, it will also serve as a foundation for future research on environmental litigation.

References

Ansari, A. H. (1998). Right to Healthful Environment as a means to ensure Environmental Justice: An Overview with Special Reference to India, Philippines, and Malaysia. Malayan Law Journal Articles, 4(1), xxv, 1-12.

Bonine, J. E. (2021). Removing barriers to justice in environmental litigation. Rutgers International Law and Human Rights Journal, 1(1), 100-129.

Keong, G. C., Shariff, A. A. M., Rajamanickam, R., & Manap, N. A. (2016). An Overview on the Public Interest Litigation in Malaysia: Development and Dilemma Under Provision of Remedies for Enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 114–118. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n2p114

Government of Malaysia v Lim Kit Siang, United Engineers (M) Berhad v Lim Kit Siang [1988] 2 MLJ 12

Hashim, N. B. (2013). Moves towards Progressive Legal Framework and Energetic Jurisprudential Behavioral on the Enforcement of Public Interest Litigation in the New Millennium. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 105, 484–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.051

Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Alam Sekitar & Anor v Kajing Tubek & Ors [1997] 4 CLJ 253

Lin, Y. (2018). Achieving Good Environmental Governance Through Environmental Public Interest Litigation. Romanian Journal of Comparative Law, 9(2), 359-388.

Maidin, A. J. & Abdulkadir, B. A. (2012). Issues And Challenges in Environmental Justice Delivery System in Malaysia and Nigeria: The Need for Liberalising The Strict Rules Of Locus Standi. Legal Network Series, 1 LNS(A) vi, 1-41.

Makinudin, A. (2022). Speech by YAA Tan Sri Dato ’ Seri Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya at Asian Legal Business ( ALB ) Malaysia 2014. Malayan Law Journal cxiv. 1, 1–4.

Malaysian Trade Union Congress & Ors v Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi & Anor [2014] 3 MLJ 145

Malik Brothers v Narendra Dadhich AIR 1999 SC 3211

Masum, A., Ahmad, N. & Aziz, H. H. A. A. (2021). The Implicit Constitutional Right to Live in a Healthy Environment: A Malaysian Perspective. Legal Network Series, 1 LNS(A) liv, 1-20.

Public Prosecutor v Megatrax Plastic Industries Sdn Bhd [2021] MLJU 1817

Public Prosecutor v Seri Ulu Langat Palm Oil Mill Sdn Bhd [2022] MLJU 1648

QSR Brands Bhd v Securities Commission [2006] 3 MLJ 164

Squintani, L. (2018). Tort-law based environmental litigation: victory or warning? Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 15 (3-4), 277-280.

Tan, R. (2004). The Role of Public Interest Litigation in Promoting Good Governance in Malaysia and Singapore. The Journal of the Malaysian Bar, XXXIII(1), 58–176. Retrieved via http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/administrative_law/the_role_of_public_interest_litigation_in_promoting_good_governance_in_malaysia_and_singapore.html

Tan Tek Seng v Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Pendidikan & Anor [1996] 1 MLJ 261

Thio, S.M. (1971). Locus Standi and Judicial Review. Singapore: Singapore University Press, pp - 1.

Todd, J. (2020). Fighting Stance In Environmental Justice Litigation. Environmental Law, 50(3), 557-614.Yunus, M. H. (2012). Judicial Activism - The Way To Go?. Malayan Law Journal, 6(1), xvii, 1-14.

Downloads

Published

2023-02-01

How to Cite

Amir, D., & Mohamad Bahri, N. A. (2023). Environmental Public Interest Litigation in Malaysia: The New Face. Bioresources and Environment, 1(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.24191/bioenv.v1i1.23