‘Selangor has always aimed to resolve temple issue’

KUALA LUMPUR: The Selangor state government has always had discussions with the Seafield Sri Maha Mariaman Temple task force and developer One City Development Sdn Bhd (One City).

Klang MP Charles Santiago (pic) said Selangor’s previous mentri besar Datuk Seri Azmin Ali had tasked him and then Subang lawmaker R. Sivarasa to talk to the temple’s task force since last year to find a solution to the problem.

“We even had meetings as late as last week here in the parliament cafeteria. We talked and conveyed the message to the present Mentri Besar (Amirudin Shari).

“We have looked at the consent judgment and also tried to talk to the developer to put forward a solution,” said Charles in a press conference in Parliament yesterday.

He said the “Mid Valley Solution” was put forward, where the temple could co-exist as part of the commercial complex. This would be similar to the Sri Maha Sakthi Mohambigai Amman Temple situated in the centre of Mid Valley City.

“It was one possible solution that worked well in the case of Mid Valley.

“We proposed the idea to One City but whenever we brought it up, One City would say it had the court’s consent judgment and asked us to speak to its lawyers,” said Charles.

He alleged that the developer was open to discussions before it was taken over by the Philippines-based Ayala Corporation.

“When the company was under Malaysian control we were talking, but once Ayala Corporation took over there was no talk. They just referred us to their legal department.

“What we were trying to propose was a solution where the winner doesn’t take all but co-exists. I think because it isn’t a Malaysian company, it doesn’t understand the sensitivities involved,” he said.

Charles said companies and corporations must take into account local sensitivities as part of their business plans.

The temple, he added, is histori- cally significant as a place to recognise the contribution of the Indian plantation workers in the area.

Charles said there were at least five huge plantations in the area with about 15 or 16 temples that had been demolished or evicted.

“There is nothing to recognise the Indian workers who worked there. That is why the temple became historically significant.

“A foreign developer doesn’t understand these dynamics,” he added.