parties including the PSP fully responsible and
accountable for their respective scope of works
gets defeated by the preclusion of site supervisors.
Matrix of responsibility not effective: The CCC
does not provide for the registration and regulation
of all parties such as contractors, sub-contractors
and tradesmen. It seems that the instant matrix
of responsibility appears to be hastily constituted
without having sorted out its effectiveness as to
its enforceability.
Ambiguity in approach: On certain occasions,
the LA still needs to approve the forms submitted
before the PSP. This breaches the spirit of the
new system. Complaints have been received from
various quarters about local authorities wanting
to conduct a physical inspection of the building
before they accept the CCC. This causes delays in
the issuance of the certificate, unrest in the public,
confusion amongst the buyers as they were made
to understand that local authorities did not have a
say in CCC issuance.
NEED FOR LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO
RESUME LIABILITY
The reason for the introduction of CCC process
was to address the unnecessary layers of
bureaucracy in the CFO system, the alleged
rampant gratifications to the local authorities,
the delays in certification by technical agencies
of the local authorities at the time of the CFO
application and the lack of technical officers to
process the CFO. However, despite being in effect
for the last 10 years, the CCC is still a dark issue
to many. Below are the reasons that portrays that
the CCC system is defective and local authorities
should resume the responsibility of issuing the
certificates preceding vacant possession.
Lack of checks and balances: Under the current
system, the PSP enjoys the total freedom to design,
produce plans and documents for the purposes of
production without having to obtain prior approval
from the local authorities. It is like giving all three
powers namely, legislative, judicial and executive
to one body. It often increases the probability of
a biased decision and prejudices the principle
of checks and balances thus compromising on
fairness.
Lack of transparency and accountability: The
PSP has substantial financial interest in the
project, risking transparency, accountability,
liability, neutrality and fairness of the process.
Often developers have expressed their struggle
with the architects over the fees rather than
having issues with the LA in obtaining the CCC.
This suggests that some developers would rather
deal with the LA that they knew rather than paying
fees to the consultants which might be higher.
URGENT NEED TO SET UP OF A TASK
FORCE
Due to the problems inherent in the CCC system,
the Malaysian construction industry is in dire need
of a revamp. As such, it is recommended that a
Task Force be set up involving all the relevant
parties to address these issues, and to propose
solutions and improvements to the system which
may include the following amongst others:
Revert to the earlier regime where the LA holds
liability
The bulk of the liability should rightfully rest
with the LA as was the case under the previous
regime. At the outset, it would seem that the
PSP carries similar liabilities as the qualified
person in the previous CFO regime in terms of
civil liability. This view is a fallacy. The PSP holds
more administrative obligations, is more reliant
on employers for help and are also liable to
other interested parties under the CCC regime.
This system should immediately be revamped
or reverted to the previous system in which the
liability was fairly set out.
Statutory regulation of contractors
For the CCC procedure to be well executed, all
parties should also be statutorily regulated in
terms of registration, conduct and practice. Under
the current procedure, such breaches are met
merely by the developer or vendor withholding
payments contractually due, imposing liquidated
and ascertained damages (LAD). Much work needs
to be done in this area to curb this deficiency.
67