Everyone plays a role in keeping Kuala Lumpur clean, says Dr Zaliha
Her statement came after His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, expressed dissatisfaction over poor cleanliness along Jalan Gallagher during a recent walkabout.
'After the reprimand, the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) scrambled to the location to carry out cleaning work and other follow-up actions. However, we cannot rely only on reactive measures,' she said.
Dr Zaliha highlighted that while DBKL has specific cleanliness programmes, sustained efforts from all stakeholders are necessary.
'We cannot neglect any area in ensuring our city remains clean,' she added during the launch of the Federal Territories-level 2025 Climate Change and Green Energy Leadership (IKLIM) Project.
Media reports revealed that Sultan Ibrahim conducted a surprise 3.2-kilometre inspection along Jalan Gallagher, criticising clogged drains, roadside litter, and uncollected tree branches obstructing pedestrian pathways.
In response, DBKL swiftly addressed the issues by clearing drains, removing garbage, and managing wild monkey disturbances in the area. - Bernama
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Free Malaysia Today
7 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
8 judges promoted, 14 JCs confirmed as judges, say sources
Eight High Court judges and 14 judicial commissioners will receive their appointment letters from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Ibrahim, today. PETALING JAYA : Eight High Court judges will be elevated to the Court of Appeal, while 14 judicial commissioners will be confirmed as High Court judges, according to sources. Those named to the Court of Appeal are believed to be Justices Shahnaz Sulaiman, Evrol Mariette Peters, Ong Chee Kwan, Radzi Abdul Hamid, Leonard David Shim, Nadzarin Wok Nordin, Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid and K Muniandy. The judicial commissioners promoted as High Court judges are expected to be Justices Maslinda @ Linda Ainal, Faridz Gohim Abdullah, Choong Yew Choy, Saiful Azian Mokhtar, Evawani Farisyta Mohamad, S Indra Nehru, M Sumathi, Moses Susayan, Kan Weng Hin, Wendy Ooi, Rosli Yusoff, Hazlina Hussain, Roszianayati Ahmad and Haldar Abdul Aziz. They are expected to receive their letters of appointment from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong at Istana Negara today, as will the new chief justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, Court of Appeal president Abu Bakar Jais and the new chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak, Azizah Nawawi. Under the Federal Constitution, judicial appointments are made by the king, on the advice of the prime minister and in consultation with the Conference of Rulers. Names of potential candidates are submitted to the prime minister by the nine-member judicial appointments commission, chaired by the chief justice of Malaysia. Wan Ahmad Farid will be Malaysia's 17th chief justice, succeeding Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat who retired earlier this month. Abu Bakar Jais replaces Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim, who retired on July 2, and Azizah replaces Abdul Rahman Sebli, who left office last week. Wan Ahmad Farid, as the nation's top judge, would take his oath of office before the king, while Abu Bakar will take his oath of office in Putrajaya before senior Court of Appeal judge P Ravinthran, while Azizah will do so before Justice Dean Wayne Daly, the most senior judge in Sabah and Sarawak. The Court of Appeal appointees will be sworn in before Abu Bakar in Putrajaya; High Court judges assigned to the peninsula will take their oath before Hasnah, while those on the bench in Sabah and Sarawak will be sworn in before Azizah.
Malay Mail
17 hours ago
- Malay Mail
When maps can lead to serious conflict: Another thorn in the Thai-Cambodian border dispute — Phar Kim Beng
JULY 28 — In South-east Asia, borders are not just lines — they are living legacies of colonial cartography, shifting sovereignties, and unresolved nation-building. The latest escalation in the Thai-Cambodian conflict reveals how something as seemingly technical as a map scale can become a powder keg of geopolitical tension. At the centre of this intensifying dispute lies a bitter disagreement: Thailand insists on the use of a 1:50,000 map; Cambodia refuses anything but the 1:200,000 version. To the untrained eye, these figures may seem inconsequential. But for seasoned observers of regional politics, this divergence underscores a broader battle over historical legitimacy, territorial sovereignty, and competing national narratives. To understand the friction, we must start with the scales themselves. Thailand's preferred map, at a scale of 1:50,000, is a product of meticulous cartography developed by its Royal Survey Department with technical input from the United States. It is based on the Mercator projection, which privileges accurate distance and direction — critical for military, civil, and administrative functions. This map presents a high-resolution portrait of the Thai-Cambodian border: every ridge, river, road, and village finely rendered, leaving little to interpretation. In contrast, Cambodia clings to a 1:200,000 scale map, originally produced by France during its colonial rule. This map, though far less detailed — 1 centimetre equating to 2 kilometres — is deeply embedded in Cambodia's legal and historical identity. Anchored in the Franco-Siamese treaties of 1904 and 1907, the map is not only a symbolic relic but the very foundation of Cambodia's official border claims. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) famously drew upon this map when awarding Cambodia control of the Preah Vihear Temple in 1962. While the ICJ did not endorse the map's precision, its citation in such a landmark case fortified Cambodia's reliance on it. At the heart of the controversy is not just scale, but projection. Thailand's Mercator-based map distorts area but preserves direction and shape — ideal for navigation but problematic for representing equatorial landmasses. Cambodia's Sinusoidal projection, meanwhile, preserves area but distorts distances, especially at the edges. These divergent projections cannot be reconciled through simple overlay or conversion. The same stretch of land will appear in different locations depending on the map used. In areas like the Dangrek Mountains — home to contested temples, scam-infested outposts, and mine-laden terrain — the consequences of such discrepancies are not abstract. They are dangerous. An aerial view shows displaced people seeking shelter near a pagoda in Oddar Meanchey province, after fleeing their homes near the Cambodia-Thailand border July 26, 2025. — AFP pic Cambodia's rejection of Thailand's map stems from both technical incompatibility and principled opposition. Phnom Penh views Thailand's 1:50,000 map as a unilateral product — one not mutually agreed upon nor recognised in the 2000 Memorandum of Understanding that was supposed to guide border demarcation. By contrast, Cambodia sees its French-produced map as a jointly recognised baseline, affirmed through decades of diplomacy and legal proceedings. Cambodia further argues that Thailand's insistence on its newer map amounts to an ex post facto revision of territorial claims. Thailand, for its part, sees the Cambodian map as outdated, imprecise, and ill-suited to modern boundary work. Bangkok contends that the colonial-era map does not meet contemporary geospatial standards and was never intended for granular demarcation. Thai officials assert that sticking to such an antiquated artifact is neither practical nor fair in a world where satellite imagery, GPS, and GIS tools offer pinpoint accuracy. Yet, what may appear fair in technical terms may be perceived as threatening in historical and emotional terms. Indeed, behind the disagreement over maps lies a deeper asymmetry of perception. For Cambodia, maps are instruments of justice — evidence of colonial wounds and international validation. For Thailand, they are tools of utility — meant to reflect ground realities, not memorialise imperial cartography. When these worldviews collide, diplomacy becomes cartographically constrained, and escalation becomes dangerously probable. This is not the first time borders drawn on paper have spilled into bloodshed. The 2008 clashes over the Preah Vihear temple led to military confrontations, international mediation, and UN involvement. The scars from that episode linger. And now, in 2025, we see history repeat itself — this time not just over temples, but over how to measure the land they sit upon. Therein lies a sobering truth: when two sovereign nations cannot agree on the very tools to define their borders, the prospect of peaceful resolution grows dim. Without consensus on the instruments of demarcation — whether satellite-generated or colonial-derived — negotiations are reduced to parallel monologues. Dialogue becomes doubly difficult when the conceptual foundations are misaligned. What then is the path forward? It is time Asean steps up — not to impose — but to facilitate a technological and diplomatic compromise. Third-party cartographic mediation, perhaps involving neutral institutions like the United Nations or regional geospatial experts, could help develop an integrated digital mapping framework that overlays both scales and projections. A hybrid platform could account for historical maps while reconciling them with modern data. What matters is not to erase history or override sovereignty, but to find common ground in shared facts. The Thai-Cambodian border dispute is not merely a technical disagreement. It is a geopolitical and psychological struggle over history, power, and identity. Until both sides can agree on the most basic of instruments — a map — their path to peace will remain dangerously convoluted. Because in South-east Asia, as this dispute reminds us, even maps can lead to war. And when they do, it is not the lines that bleed — but the people who live along them. *Phar Kim Beng, PhD, is the Director of the Institute of Internationalisation and Asean Studies (IINTAS) at the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). He served as a former Head Teaching Fellow at Harvard University and is a Cambridge Commonwealth Scholar. **This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
New Straits Times
18 hours ago
- New Straits Times
King appoints new Chief Justice, judges at Istana Negara
KUALA LUMPUR: His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, today presented the instrument of appointment to the new Chief Justice, President of the Court of Appeal, Court of Appeal Judges, and High Court Judges at Istana Negara. The ceremony, held at the Singgahsana Kecil (Minor Throne Room), was also attended by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Deputy Prime Ministers Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, and Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Shamsul Azri Abu Bakar. According to a Facebook post, during the ceremony, Sultan Ibrahim presented the instrument of appointment for the position of Chief Justice to Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, who then took his oath of office and loyalty before the King. His Majesty also presented the instruments of appointment for the President of the Court of Appeal to Datuk Abu Bakar Jais, followed by the appointment of Datuk Azizah Nawawi as Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak. In addition, instruments of appointment as Court of Appeal Judges were awarded to Dr Shahnaz Sulaiman; Datin Paduka Evrol Mariette Felix Michael Peters; Ong Chee Kwan; Datuk Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid; Leonard David Shim; Nadzarin Wok Nordin; Datuk Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid and Muniandy Kannyappan. Meanwhile, instruments of appointment as High Court Judges were awarded to Maslinda @ Linda Mohd Ainal; Datuk Faridz Gohim Abdullah; Dr Choong Yeow Choy; Saiful Azian Mokhtar; Evawani Farisyta Mohamad; Indra Nehru Savandiah; Sumathi Murugiah; Moses Susayan; Kan Weng Hin; Dr Wendy Ooi Su Ghee; Mohd Rosli Yusoff; Dr Hazlina Hussain; Roszianayati Ahmad and Mohamad Haldar Abdul Aziz.
