NAME : NURUL SHUHADAH BINTI MOHD ANNUAR

STUDENT ID : 2018440816
CLASS : BAE6B
SUBJECT : ENVIRONMENTAL LAW (LAW 573)

TAKE HOME TEST

QUESTION 2

You recently moved to a small village in Perak. It is located near a large rubber factory. Your
house is perfectly located on a beautiful small stream that flows year round. One day you
notice a lot of dark liquid in the stream even though there has been no rain recently. You look
for some explanation and discover that the factory has been discharging wastewater into the
stream. When you speak to the factory manager, he explains that it is the normal procedure for
them to discharge the wastewater as long as it does not disturb the life form in the stream. You
are still not happy, since the water now is starting to smell bad.

You look up the nearest lawyer in the little town near you to get some advice about what to do.
The lawyer says you are wasting your time. He says that because discharging wastewater is a
common practise of rubber industry and is not against the Environmental Quality Act 1974.
Sitting next to the lawyer is someone you recognise from your class who is well versed in
environmental law. Is that person nodding in agreement or disagreement with the advice the
lawyer just gave you? Support your answer.
ANSWER

Based on the statement given, it seems that the river stream has been polluted due the
discharging of wastewater by a rubber factory. The stream condition is quite serious since the
dark liquid appeared and it produce foul smell due to the discharge. Water pollution is the
contamination of water bodies usually as a result from human activities. Water bodies are
including the rivers, lakes, oceans, aquifers, and groundwater. Water pollution results when
contaminants are introduced into the natural environment. Rubber industry is an economically
and socially significant industry in our country. According to Department of Environment
(DOE,2000), rubber processing is one of the biggest sources of industrial water pollution.
According to research on Treatment of wastewater from rubber industry in Malaysia by
Muhammadi (2010), rubber industry consumes large volumes of water, uses chemical and
other utilities and produces enormous amounts of wastes and effluent. Discharge of untreated
rubber effluent to waterways resulted in water pollution that affected the aquatic life as well as
human health. Since the production of rubber products from natural rubber needs large
amount of water for its operation, the rapid production has produced large quantities of
effluent from the processing. The sources of rubber wastewater or effluent in Malaysia are
skim, latex serum, uncoagulated latex and washings from the various processing stages.

There are several issues that I would like to point out based on the situation. The issues
are:
i. Does manufacturing industries such as the rubber factory is liable to pollute? (discharge
their wastewater into the stream)?
ii. Under what condition/s that allow a factory to discharge their wastewater? (if it is
allowed)
iii. What would be the penalty if the actions are violated the law?
iv. Is there any permissible level to discharge or to pollute the environment?
v. Does manufacturing industries such as rubber factory need to take certain actions or
practice before discharging their wastewater into the stream?
vi. What action can we take to address this matter?

The Malaysian Government instituted a set of environmental regulations that are

included in the Environmental Quality Act (EQA) 1974. EQA, 1974 is an act relating to the
prevention, abatement, control of pollution and enhancement of the environment, and for
purposes connected therewith and it shall apply to the whole Malaysia. Therefore, we use EQA,
1974 to answer the issues that stated above. First of all, rubber processing factory is
categorized as prescribed premises therefore, any person intending to carry out such activity
shall obtain prior written permission from the Director General of Environment as under
Section 19 of EQA, 1974. According to Section 2 of EQA, 1974, “prescribed premises” means any
premises prescribed by the Minister under Section 18 of EQA and they are to be licensed as
stated under Section 18. According to Section 18(3), any person found guilty of operating
prescribed premises for rubber factory without proper license shall be liable to a maximum fine
of fifty thousand or two years imprisonment or both. Therefore, the rubber factory should have
the license to operate or else they are operating illegally which should be punish.

According to Section 25(1) EQA (1974), no person shall, unless licensed, emit, discharge
or deposit any environmentally hazardous substances, pollutants or wastes into any inland
waters in contravention of the acceptable conditions specified under section 21. According to
Section 25(3) EQA (1974), persons who shall be guilty of any offence, shall be liable to a fine not
exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding five
years or both and to a further fine not exceeding one thousand ringgit a day for every day that
the offence is continued after a notice by the Director General requiring him to cease the act
specified therein has been served upon him. In other words, the Department of Environment
(DOE) issues “license to pollute” whereby without this license, pollution is illegal. The license
allows pollution up to certain specified levels. Breaching those license conditions or polluting
without a license is a criminal offence and generally punishable by fines or imprisonment or can
be both. Therefore, for the rubber factory issue, the rubber factory can only discharge their
wastewater into the stream if the factory has the license to do so. The authority supposed to
check whether the rubber factory has the proper license to operate and whether they have the
legal license to pollute.

When we talk about the license to pollute, there will be another issue that arise which
is, is there any limit level of discharge effluent into inland waters? Indeed, there is certain
permissible levels for discharging effluents. The rubber processing sectors must be compliance
with the discharge standard. Therefore, the next step is for the authority to check whether the
rubber factory only discharging permissible levels of effluent. The authority should also check
on the stream that has been polluted. It is crucial for them to check on the stream because it
might cause danger to the aquatic life and to humans when we consume the polluted water.
The change of the colour of the river stream from clear to dark and at the same time it
produced bad odour are not a good sign. There must be something wrong somewhere and the
authorities are responsible to check on it and take appropriate action.
 There are quite number of previous cases regarding the discharge of effluent into
stream. Udapec Sdn Bhd (May 98), the company was charged under Section 25(1) of the EQA
which has a maximum fine of RM100,000 or 5 years jail or both for emitting effluents into the
public drain which later flowed to sungai Langat. The court fined the company RM40,000. YTY
Industries Sdn Bhd (1998) was fined RM10,000 after it admitted discharging effluent more than
the permitted level under the Environmental Quality (Sewerage & Industrial Effluents)
Regulations 1979. Alor Gajah Industrial Estate (1997), a managing director pleaded guilty for
violating Section 25(3) of the EQA by dumping untreated effluents into the drain. He was fined
RM20,000 or 6 months jail and he chose to pay the fine.

The next issue is, does manufacturing industries such as rubber factory need to take
certain actions or practice before discharging their wastewater into the stream? According to
Section 31 of EQA, 1974, gives power to the Director General of the DOE to require the owner
or occupier of prescribed premises to install control equipment for treatment plant in rubber
and crude palm oil processing sectors in order to meet the emission or effluent discharge
standard. In other words, all manufacturing industries are required to install wastewater
treatment systems to arrest their water pollutants before being dumped into rivers. The
manufacturing industries are encouraged to implement alternative options such as cleaner
production, waste minimization and waste re-utilization in order to reduce water pollution
further. Such options could reduce waste generation and ensure compliance with discharge
standards. Efforts are also being stepped up to eliminate indiscriminate disposal of toxic wastes
and uncontrolled release of persistent organic pollutants. The management of toxic wastes is
based on the cradle-to-grave concept. There are laws in place to control their generation,
storage, transportation, treatment and disposal. Therefore, the authority supposed to check
whether the rubber factory is practicing cradle-to-grave concept including treating their
wastewater from pollutants before discharge into the stream.

In conclusion, a friend that is well versed in environmental law would be disagree with
the statement made by the lawyer as well as the factory manager. It does not mean that if the
rubber factory has the license to pollute, they can pollute or do whatever they want. The law
permitted them to pollute but with conditions which they need to have proper and legal license
and only discharging permissible level of effluent into water stream. It is not stop right there, in
fact, they need to ensure that they are installing wastewater treatment systems and practice
the cradle-to-grave concept. Without proper treatment, the discharge of wastewater from
rubber processing industry to the environment may cause serious and prolong consequences.
In the end, we are the one that being affected by our own doings. It is our responsibility to take
care of the environment. We should immediately report to the local authority if we witness
activities that are violated by Environment Quality Act (1974). Appropriate action should be
taken towards the culprits.

References

Daud, H. (2009). Legislative approach to water quality management in Malaysia: success and
challanges. Department of Environment, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment,
Malaysia.

Environmental Quality Act 1974. Laws of Malaysia. Retrieved from

http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/uploads/files/Publications/LOM/EN/Act%20127.pdf

Idris, A. B., Mamun, A. A., Amin, M., Soom, M., Noor, W., & Azmin, W. (2003). Review of water
quality standards and practices in Malaysia. Pollution Research, 22(2), 145-155.

Malaysia, D. O. E. (2010). Environmental requirements: a guide for investors.”.

Mohammadi, M., Man, H. C., Hassan, M. A., & Yee, P. L. (2010). Treatment of wastewater from
rubber industry in Malaysia. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(38), 6233-6243.

Noor Artika, H., Yusof, M. Z., & Nor Faiza, M. T. (2019). An Overview of Scheduled Wastes
Management in Malaysia. Journal of Wastes and Biomass Management (JWBM), 1(2), 01-04

Norha Abu Hanifah. (2019). A Student Guide: Understanding Environmental Law in Malaysia.
Hulu Langat, Selangor: MALAHA Press. 101-106 p.