MBG 1432

Case Study 1
February 2006

Articles Review
Self-certification or Self-destruction? and Self-certification, as Architects see it

Being real, I am not a big fan of newspaper reading but reading in general is something I self-claimed,
enthusiastic about. Given these two articles from one of the local newspaper for a review, I imagine this
particular task as undeniably daunting rather than fascinating. In spite of this, thanks to the brilliant catchy
phrases such as Self-certification or Self-destruction? and Self-certification as Architects see it;
manipulated as the headlines, that it inadvertently made me more willing to read further and distinguish my
personal review on the overall discussion.

Being a so-called young professional in the construction industry, my ability to better reason intangibly in
issues pertaining to the industrys whereabouts, might still be questionable and lacking in validity?. Thus,
by just bluntly reading these two headlines alone, has given me the first-glance-impression that both
articles were all about two different view points of two different parties, apparently on the same issue
certification of Certificate of Fitness (CF).

The first discussion was raised in the earlier edition, concerning on the idea initiated by the Prime Minister,
in passing on the authorization of certifying CF from the local authorities to the professional consultants. I
would say that from the opening prayers made by this writer in reaction to this, it could be easily
speculated that he or she might not preferably be one of the so-called professionals but perhaps, someone
relatively involved as the end-user of a housing project in general or specifically, a member from the
House Buyers Association. Whilst, the later edition was visibly an immediate reaction from the so-called
professional - which in this case an Architect, against the statements made by the Association. Being
considered always as the traditional lead consultant in most construction project, the response shown by
this writer is something I reckon, not unpredictable since it is in the nature of most leaders to stand up
and held their head up high, as an invisible shield against criticism?

As a laymans guide or shall I re-quote it as a hitch-hike back to the history, the Certificate of Fitness
(CF) for occupation is an official assurance that your newly constructed house will not crumble before
your very eyes. Traditionally, the CF is issued by the local authorities after ensuring that the building of
the houses, conforms with the various pre-requisites, by-laws and as well as the approved layout and
building plans owners are only allowed to move in after the issuance of CF. The reasoning behind this is
to ensure that the owners do not move into houses that are sub-standard or dangerous for occupation. Then
again, over the years, the issuance of CF has become so entangled in red tape causing undue delay for
house buyers wanting to move into their new homes. After years of complaints, the Government recently
decided to do away with the CF as well as the local authoritys involvement in the process. The Cabinet
has agreed in principle, later announced by the Prime Minister and instantly sparkled the arguments of
yes, no or even perhaps, among the parties concerned.

Both writers seem to have their own predicament in presenting their case some points sounded promising
to the other but might be a vice-versa to the other side. In general, I personally agree that the transition
of powers from the local authorities to the professional consultants is an audacious step that will save time,

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1
Nazirah binti Abd Rahim
 MBG 1432
Case Study 1
February 2006

cut un-necessary red tape and improve the public delivery system. After all, moving into new homes
expeditiously, without being caught in a vague waiting game is what I believed, is most desirous to
homebuyers. Moreover, the local authorities being part of the Governments agent are infamous for their
long list of procedures, processes and bureaucracies, or else the open statement made some time ago by
one of the concerned Ministers, Jangan jadikan pelanggan seperti bola would not be that applauded.

The whole idea pictured by the Prime Minister when promoting the changes involving his very own
army, was actually aiming to put in place a system of governance that is more responsive to peoples
needs by enabling the officers to concentrate on other important tasks as well as cutting down opportunities
for corruption. I always perceived the new Prime Minister, as someone who truly believes that honesty is
the genuine hallmark of every man and his clear purpose in this, is unmistakably relevant. However, by
focusing into one particular sector alone, in his war against corruption? Sadly, I would judge it as a
mission-impossible. I would agree that by eliminating one least important task might substantiate these
officers with more quality time in playing their national responsibilities well forget about quality, at
least more time. As for corruption, it persists and will always exist in the working culture of either
government or a private sector. It would not totally eliminated for sure but perhaps, slightly reduced or
worse come to worse, deviated to other sectors an endless solution I presume? In relation to this, being
the apprentice of the professionals myself, I do aspire that honor, responsibility, accountability and
leadership are the hallmarks of professionalism but truth hurts as human is always a human. I personally
believe that as long as the elements of interest and power comes hand in hand, the probabilities to forgo
the rules are always welcoming. The President of Consumers Association of Penang (CAP), S.M.
Mohamed Idris pointed out that these professionals depend on developers for their livelihood; hence, they
can be coerced into the interest of developers. For this reason, the questionable fact of how independent
can they be? or the branding as Developers agent, raised and proclaimed by the Association is
something I consider as not groundless.

When one party is contesting the idea of self-certification by professional consultants, the Architects
however, see the role of certification as a public service, for which no additional fee is charged even
though there is considerable cost and liability involved. As I read through the article dated 22 January, the
whole discussion was a complete trajectory to the earlier edition a reinforced version of which they key
words are yes, yes and yes to self-certification. The writer has supported his or her arguments with the
traditional clauses of law from Acts and Regulations, relating to the conventional roles of an Architect.
When I first read it, I was instantly agreed with his or her idea of self-certification. Being a young
professional myself in the same industry with these self-certifiers, the word professionalism is
something to be proud of and can not be compromised perhaps I was overwhelmed with self-satisfaction
at my first reading attempt, that I overlooked other factors as well.

Yes it is indeed true that Architects and Engineers has been certifying CF for ages, competent enough to do
the work after going through series of tedious studies, internship and exams and under the Building by-
laws, they are legally responsible for their work. When it comes to the issue of conflict of interest, at
least the Board of Architects was frank enough to acknowledge these problems, whereby the black sheep

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2
Nazirah binti Abd Rahim
 MBG 1432
Case Study 1
February 2006

would be struck off from the professional list if were found guilty of fraudulent on top of the maximum
RM5k fine. This I believe, strongly signifies that these wrong-doings do happen and people are aware of
it, even the players themselves. Ironically, the writer seems to be too sure about the truthfulness of his or
her profession that statements such as, No amount of money can buy a person this position and Is a
person with this background and training going to bend rules for money?. Perhaps he or she should learn
to look down once in a while. As Tony Chang, the Secretary-General of House Buyers Association
commented that, an Architect or an Engineer being de-registered is nothing compared to the home
owners misery and I could not agree more with him.

One of the other issues that captured my interest was the discussion on the quality of the houses delivered.
As mentioned, Architects and Engineers appointed to supervise in ensuring that the final products are of an
acceptable standard and quality and how the confusion rises between the quality of finishes and the
quality of projects. At the end of the article, it stated that the contractors are to be accountable and
responsible for the works they carry out in improving workmanship. Before, it was expressed that the
integrity of the Architects or Engineers is not the issue. After reading this viewpoint, I found that it is
unfair to blame the contractor, whereas the Architect or Engineer, being the so-called qualified
professionals should be thoroughly competent and fully responsible as the lead consultant. With the
knowledge and power they have, I am sure the best-finished project is a surety if they seriously follow the
rule of working diligently?

In conclusion, it is unfortunate that, like virtually every industry, their good work has been tainted by a few
bad apples because I am certain the majority of these professional consultants are up to the task to handle
self-certification competently, even for the local authorities, even though there have been instances of
corruption hindering the application of CFs?

Nonetheless, I shall foresee the overall scene between these house buyers local heroes on one side and
Architects or Engineers on the other side as an endless debate, when it comes to reaching a mutual trust in
the issue of CF certification. Perhaps when the two groups remain at opposite ends, there needs to be a
referee; a mediator or a complete stranger from a third party? Bluntly (again), I would say yes!

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3
Nazirah binti Abd Rahim