MALAYSIA ETHICAL ISSUE:

MRR2NUR ASYRAF BIN ABDUL RAHIM (K)MUHAMMAD FAIZAL BIN ABDULLAHNUR HASANAH BINTI SHAFEI

OBJECTIVES

1 •To give a better insight of the unethical issues that occurred in Malaysia

2 •To educate people about the importance of adopting ethical conducts to prevent disastrous consequences

GROUP 4 2

OVERVIEW OF MRR2 [1]

Built by Malaysian Public Works Department (JKR)

To connect neighborhoods near Kuala Lumpur boundary

Cost RM238.8 million

Completed in 34 months (May 1999 to March 2002)

3GROUP 4

OVERVIEW OF MRR2

• Construction of MRR2 was divided by 3 phase : [1]

Kepong-Gombak

Gombak-Ampang

Ampang-Sri Petaling

Bumihiway (M) Sdn BhdKonsortium Kontraktor

Melayu (Wilayah)

CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES

Beam cracks

on the

Kepong

Flyover

5GROUP 4

CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES

Investigations were carried out by governmentAnti-Corruption Agency investigated possible fraud [2]

Fear about the safety on the faulty

Kepong Flyover

More than 7000 cracks detected

31 out of 33 pillars have obvious

cracks

1st

Closure

8 August2004

6GROUP 4

CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES

Works Minister,

Dato' Seri S Samy Vellu

7

P

W

D

'

s

c

o

n

s

u

lt

a

n

t

(

K

o

h

l

e

r

&

S

e

it

h

)

f

i

n

d

i

n

g

s

w

a

s

d

i

s

m

i

s

s

e

d

GROUP 4

CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES

12 August, 2004 The government of Malaysia then appointed British Halcrow Consultancy Ltd to study the cracks that have appeared on 31 of the 32 crossbeams since 2000.

findings from Halcrow Consultants Ltd suggested design deficiencies and the improper anchoring were responsible for cracks and were finally accepted by the ministry

The flyover closed in August 2004 >>waterproofed the bridge to prevent further cracks>>reopened in December 2004 [2]

8GROUP 4

CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES

I •On 4th Feb 2006, the Kepong Flyover was closed again after serious damages was confirmed

II •Many complaints arrived about the damages on MRR2

III •Traffic jam has rose due to incompletion of MRR2

IV •On 8 December 2006, the Kepong Flyover was reopened to light traffic [3]

2ndClosure

4 Feb 2006

9GROUP 4

HIGHLIGHTS

18/8/2004

RM20mil to repair within 3 months

Yet to determine the cause of cracks  

Deny the possibility of design fault

1/2/2007

Repairs cost RM 40 mil RM70mil

22/2/2006 Repair cost more than RM 40 milllion

Work Minister called to explain expenditure

10GROUP 4

3 August 2008

11GROUP 4

ETHICAL THEORY

“Up to now, Malaysians still do not have a  full and proper  picture about the MRR2 flyover cracks.  As two consultants, one from Australia by the contractor and a consultant from Germany appointed by the Public Works Department, have come out with different findings about the MRR2 flyover cracks, how could  there be public confidence about the repair work undertaken  in the past five days? “ Media Statementby Lim Kit Siang (14/8/2004)

12

GROUP 4

Definition: Balance between good and bad consequences of an action [4]

Utilitarianism

13GROUP 4

GOOD: MRR2

brought travel

within easy reach

BAD: Controversial Issues.

Right Ethics

• Definition: People have the fundamental rights that other people have a duty to respect [4]

GROUP 4 14

Right Ethics

The right to use the flyover safely

Do not want to keep stuck in traffic jam as a result from the closure of the MRR2

Do not want to see the few well-connected companies or individuals profit at the public expense

15GROUP 4

Duty Ethics

Definition •People have duties to protect the rights of others

Fidelity • the duty to keep promises

- Contractors and engineers have failed to

design and build the flyover in compliance with the

contract16GROUP 4

Duty Ethics

– “Samy Vellu is acting as if he is the Minister for Bumi Hiway, the

contractor for the MRR2, instead of being Minister for 25 million

Malaysians.”

Justice•the duty to recognize merit work minister does not take any action against the irresponsible contractors and consultant

17GROUP 4

Duty Ethics

Repairs cost RM40 mil to RM70mil

Cause by improper planning and poor cost estimation and poor administrative of the Work Minister

This expenses could be reduced if he appointed a reliable contractor to build the flyover

Beneficence

•the duty to improve the conditions

18GROUP 4

Virtue Ethics

Engineers did not fully supervise the project

Minister did not give explanation of the RM70 million bill

No actions taken towards original contractors

Irresponsibility

19GROUP 4

Virtue Ethics

Denied cracks were due to design flaw

Did not build according to right specifications and designs

Dishonestly

20GROUP 4

Safety And Risk

Definition: Ensure safety of public

21GROUP 4

Safety And Risk

22GROUP 4

Safety design criteria

•“ ‘space-age carbon-fibre pre-stressed trusses’ would be used to repair the pillars, beams and girders of the flyover: a tensile strength five times stronger than that of steel” [5]

Risk-Benefit Analysis

•“Samy Vellu is giving the impression the repair work for the MRR2 flyover is very simple and straightforward, would not even require the three months mentioned by him.” [5]

Need = There must be a clear and important harm that can be avoided by blowing the whistle

MEANING: An act by an employee of informing the public or higher management of

unethical or illegal behavior by an employer or supervisor

WHISTLE BLOWING

Proximity = The whistleblower must be in a very clear position to report on the problem

Capability = The whistleblower must have a reasonable chance of success in stopping the harmful activity

OCCURS

23GROUP 4

Last Resort = Should be attempted only if there is no one else more capable and all other lines of action within the organization have been shut off

ANALYSIS OF THE MRR2 CASE

1) AUTHORITYS INVOLVEMENTKKR

(Kementerian Kerja Raya)

Agency

JKR (Jabatan Kerja Raya)

CIDB (Lembaga Pembangunan

Industri Pembinaan Malaysia)

BQSM (Lembaga Juruukur Bahan

Malaysia)

BEM (Lembaga Jurutera Malaysia)

BOA (Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia)

MHA (Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia)

24GROUP 4

ANALYSIS OF THE MRR2 CASE2) PERSONAL VS BUSINESS CONFLICT

MINISTERY(strong parties)

ENGINEER(responsibility)

CONTRACTOR(work)

HIGH COUNCIL BOARD

(reputation)

CITIZEN(daily usage)

MEDIA(news)

CONFLICT

Right and wrong ethics,Profitable and Loses,

Rules and Regulations,Cost-Benefit Analysis

25GROUP 4

ANALYSIS OF THE MRR2 CASE

3) AMONG RULES AND REGULATIONS1) Engineers Act 1967 (Rev 2007)2) Regulations 1990 (Rev 2003)3) Code of Professional Conduct

1) Architect Act 19672) Architect Rules 1996

1) Standard Specifications for Building Works 2005

1) QS Act Revised 20022) QS Rule Amendment 2004

1) Design Standard2) Maintenance

Manual and Guideline (civil, electrical and mechanical)

3) Guideline

1) Contractor Code of Ethics

26GROUP 4

CONCLUSION

1) CORE CODE OF ETHICS REFERRED FROM VARIES CODE OF ETHICS

A Professional shall at all times hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public

A Professional shall conduct himself honourably, responsibly, ethically and lawfully so as to enhance the

honour, reputation and usefulness of the profession

A Professional shall act for each employer or clients as faithful agent or trustee

A Professional shall undertake assignments only if he is qualified by education and experience in the specific

technical fields in which he is involved

A Professional shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner

27GROUP 4

CONCLUSION

2) ACTION WHICH SUPPOSE TO BE AVOIDED

Bribery takenMiscalculation

TragedyBreach of contract

Doesn’t follow specificationLack communication link

Bad constructionLack team work

Unethical action takenBad media coverageBurden the countryBurden the citizen

Fired employeeAccusing responsibility

28GROUP 4

REFERENCES

[1] Maverick, SM., Project Report Middle Ring Road 2.

February, 2006 was retrieved from http://mavrkyprojectphoto.blogspot.com/2006/02/middle-ring-road-2.html

[2] Brandon, H., Controversial Issues Middle Ring Road 2, was retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_Middle_Ring_Road_2

[3] Maverick, SM., Risk, Health & Safety. 2006 was retrieved from http://constructionrisk.blogspot.com/

[4] Charles B. Fleddermann., Engineering Ethics (3rd Edition), Pearson Practice Hall , University of New Mexico, 2008

[5] Lim Kit Siang, Media Statement. August, 2004 was retrieved from http://www.dapmalaysia.org/all-archive/English/2004/aug04/lks/lks3158.htm

[6] Main Portal for Kementerian Kerja Raya

http://www.kkr.gov.my/

29GROUP 4

Q & AQ & A

The End

30GROUP 4