Urban Renewal Bill Malaysia: Can My Old Condo Be Redeveloped Without My Consent?

What actually happened to the Urban Renewal Bill? The full timeline

The Bill’s name as tabled was the Urban Renewal Bill 2025, with the long title “An Act to control and supervise urban renewal for the purposes of town planning and for other related matters”. It was moved by Housing and Local Government Minister Nga Kor Ming. The earlier name in circulation, “Urban Renewal Act (URA)”, was press shorthand, never a statute. We do not publish a D.R. number for the Bill: none is printed on the copy we could reach, so we cannot verify one.

What was actually said on the day. Fahmi Fadzil’s account was that Cabinet had agreed to withdraw the Bill to allow for amendments and enhancements, to be presented to and decided by Cabinet at a later date to be announced. The reason given was that the Bill needed enhancements to address urban housing issues more effectively and fairly, particularly those affecting the urban poor — reflecting concerns raised by MPs and feedback from UMNO and other Cabinet members. He also said the process was expected to take some time. The redraft sits with the Attorney General’s Chambers, goes back to Cabinet, and only then to Parliament. Nobody has given a date.

What consent thresholds did the draft actually propose?

The thresholds were in Clause 19, and they were tiered, not a single number. This is the text as tabled on 21 August 2025:

Building age ran from the date of the certificate of fitness for occupation or the CCC.

What Clause 24 promised — and why it is not like-for-like replacement

Clause 24, headed protection of an interested person, obliged the Federal or State Executive Committee to ensure a participant received an offer of benefit “not less favourable” than the offer of benefit he was offered before, could remain in the urban renewal area unless he decided otherwise, and was informed of progress on request.

There is no one-for-one unit guarantee in that, no minimum replacement floor area, and no compensation formula anywhere in the Bill. The law firm Y Kong, Wong & Partners flags the gap directly: the Bill does not define what a “benefit” is, nor the baseline it must not be less favourable than. Skrine’s review lists no compensation formula, no replacement-unit requirement and no relocation assistance as critical omissions. The widely quoted assurance that “residents will be retained at the same location” was a ministerial statement on 27 August 2025, describing Clause 24’s option to remain — not an obligation on anyone to hand over a unit of equal or greater size.

Clause 21(4) is what made it a forced-sale Bill

The Bill created no new power of expropriation. Clause 4 defined an “urban renewal area” as an area or site identified for urban renewal in a development plan. Clause 21 gave the Minister the power to declare areas in the Federal Territories (Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya, Labuan) and the State Authority the power to declare areas in the States, by gazette notification. Clause 21(4) then required the approved developer to transfer or acquire any alienated land within the area by purchase or by compulsory acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act 1960.

In plain terms: the Bill routed majority consent into a compulsory acquisition machine that has existed since 1960, which is why Clauses 19 and 21(4) only make sense read together. It also created Federal and State Executive Committees and a Federal Urban Renewal Mediation Committee as the dispute forum, and required a developer to commence within 24 months of gazettal. Territorially (Clause 1) it covered Peninsular Malaysia and Labuan; Sabah and Sarawak were outside it.

Were landed homes in scope? This is the point most coverage missed

The Bill was area-based, not tenure-based. “Urban renewal area” was defined by area or site, and Clause 21(4) spoke of any alienated land within it — alienated land includes an ordinary landed title, not only a strata parcel. Datuk Chang Kim Loong, Secretary-General of the National House Buyers Association, made exactly this point on 16 January 2026: the definition is area-based, not property-type-based, so by default it includes any kind of property, and the Bill empowered the Minister to designate a landed housing area as an urban renewal area. Under Clause 19’s age test, a house more than 30 years old would have sat at 75%, and most Peninsular landed housing built in the 1970s to 1990s is over 30 years old. The fair caveat: that is HBA’s reading of a withdrawn draft, not a judicial or ministerial interpretation, and no clause expressly named landed housing — so the honest formulation is “the Bill as drafted did not exclude landed homes, and HBA warned it would catch them”, not a settled legal conclusion.

Who objected, and on what grounds

• The Malaysian Bar, 27 August 2025, signed by President Mohamad Ezri b Abdul Wahab, raised six objections: the thresholds were too low (the Bar wanted at least 85% for older buildings and 90% for newer ones); consent verification was left entirely to the appointed developer, removing direct State participation; compulsory acquisition of non-consenting owners merely because a developer hit a threshold raised serious concerns about fairness and due process; the revised Bill allowed an area to be declared with no prior engagement with affected landowners; there was no statutory protection for tenants and occupiers — temporary housing, relocation support, right of return; and mediation alone was an inadequate dispute mechanism. The Bar asked for the second reading to be deferred.
• Lawyers for Liberty, 22 August 2025, signed by adviser N Surendran, called the Bill void and unconstitutional: Clause 21’s broad declaration power rendered the Article 13 right to property illusory, and compulsory seizure of a non-consenting resident’s home for town planning purposes was disproportionate under Article 8. They also argued that consent obtained in the shadow of compulsory acquisition is not voluntary consent. (They did not raise a federal-competence argument, so do not attribute one to them.)
• Four Perikatan Nasional state governments, 26 August 2025: the Bill undermined state autonomy over urban planning under the Town and Country Planning Act 1976, left compensation and landowner protection unclear, and could disrupt the balance of ethnic communities and property ownership in urban areas, especially among Bumiputera, creating communal divides in cities.
• Government MPs, 28 August 2025. The deferral was forced by resistance from Barisan Nasional and PKR MPs — from inside the governing coalition — with cross-bench protest in the chamber. Fahmi later cited UMNO’s feedback as a reason for withdrawal.
• For balance, the Bill had state-government supporters. Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow backed it, saying the dissenting states do not face crumbling high-rises, and the Selangor Menteri Besar backed it too.

The forced-sale power that already exists: the Land Acquisition Act 1960

This is the statute an owner should actually know about, because it is in force now and needs no Urban Renewal Act. Section 3(1) permits the State Authority to acquire land needed for (a) any public purpose; (b) an economic development deemed beneficial to the public of Malaysia, or to a class of the public, or to a person or corporation; and (c) mining, residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial or recreational purposes, or a combination.

Limb (b) is the one to understand. It is not confined to roads and schools. It is also precisely the power the Urban Renewal Bill proposed to plug majority consent into, through Clause 21(4) — and it exists with or without that Bill.

Compensation is market value — what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller in fair conditions — assessed by reference to the publication date of the section 8 declaration, taking account of size, shape, condition, location, intended use and development potential, plus, where applicable, severance, injurious affection and removal expenses (First Schedule).

Johor Bahru, Kuala Lumpur and Penang: identical statute, different state layer

Start with the line most buyers get wrong: the consent threshold for terminating a strata scheme is federal and identical in all three places. Sections 56 and 57 of Act 318 and the whole of Act 757 apply the same way in Johor, Kuala Lumpur and Penang, because all three sit in Peninsular Malaysia. There is no state variation in the threshold. What differs is everything around it.

What is genuinely state-level: who declares an urban renewal area (the State Authority in a State, the Minister in Kuala Lumpur), plot ratio and density, development charges, state land premiums, state consent to transfer, and Malay reserve land — see Bumi lots and Malay reserve land.

One thing that does exist and almost nobody writes about. In September 2023 the housing ministry introduced urban renewal implementation guidelines — Garis Panduan Pelaksanaan Pembaharuan Semula Bandar (GPP PSB) — through PLANMalaysia. They are guidelines, not legislation: they create no consent threshold and no power to compel anyone, and what they offer is non-tax incentives to developers, including increased density or plot ratio. We did not open the guidelines themselves, so we neither quote them nor publish a reference number. The point for an owner: urban renewal in Malaysia has been happening since 2023 on guidelines plus consent plus plot-ratio sweeteners. The Act was never what would have made redevelopment possible — it was what would have made it possible without unanimity.

When should you check this again?

The current Dewan Rakyat meeting runs from 5 October to 8 December 2026 (37 sitting days), as confirmed by Speaker Tan Sri Johari Abdul and reported on 23 September 2026. Budget 2027 is tabled on 9 October 2026 within that meeting. If you are buying rather than redeveloping, the Budget is what to watch, and it is the subject of a separate article on this site.

• As at 23 September 2026 the Speaker said he had received no papers for several expected bills, and the Urban Renewal Bill was not among the bills he mentioned at all.
• A withdrawn Bill must be re-introduced from first reading. So the earliest possible revival is a fresh first reading in this meeting — and nothing suggests one is coming.
• Our recommendation: check again after 8 December 2026. If no new Urban Renewal Bill has had a first reading by then, everything on this page still stands.
• One disclosure about the dates themselves: Parliament’s own sitting-calendar page could not be opened while this was written, so the dates above come from reporting of the Speaker’s statement, not from the calendar.

• Whether a new Urban Renewal Bill has had a first reading (Dewan Rakyat order paper and bill list)
• Whether the AGC redraft has gone back to Cabinet, and whether any date has been published
• Whether your own state has introduced its own urban renewal guideline or pilot, on the Penang model
• Whether the local plan covering your lot has been amended or re-gazetted
• Whether any Form A or Form D gazette notification covers your lot

Sources & verification

1. Urban Renewal Bill 2025, the Bill as tabled (copy hosted by CLJ Law)
2. Skrine, March 2025 — A Review of the Proposed Urban Renewal Act
3. Y Kong, Wong & Partners — Legal update: Urban Renewal Bill 2025
4. Bernama, 23 January 2026 — Cabinet agrees to withdraw the Urban Renewal Bill (Fahmi Fadzil)
5. Malay Mail, 23 January 2026 — Fahmi: Putrajaya pulls Urban Renewal Bill to make room for fresh input
6. The Star, 28 August 2025 — Urban Renewal Bill likely to be deferred, won't be debated today
7. The Edge Malaysia, 27–28 August 2025 — single 80% threshold announced, second reading deferred
8. The Star, 4 December 2025 — Dewan Rakyat adjourns for the year with the Bill undebated
9. The Star, 11 May 2026 — Delays in tabling URA hamper efforts for redevelopment, says Penang rep
10. Malaysian Bar, 27 August 2025 — Position on the Urban Renewal Bill 2025
11. Lawyers for Liberty, 22 August 2025 — Urban Renewal Bill 2025 is void and unconstitutional
12. Datuk Chang Kim Loong (HBA), EdgeProp, 16 January 2026 — Landed property: the URA Bill includes your home too
13. Ilmiah binti Bakri, "The Redevelopment Pandemonium of Stratified Building", International Journal of Survey, Planning and Settlement — published by the Department of the Director General of Lands and Mines (Federal); source for s.57(1), s.57(7) and the 87% example
14. National House Buyers Association (HBA) reprint of the Strata Titles Act 1985, Part VIII (ss.56–57)
15. Strata Management Act 2013 (Act 757), English text — s.2 definitions of unanimous, special and comprehensive resolution
16. Mondaq — Compulsory land acquisition in Malaysia: compensation and disputes (Land Acquisition Act 1960)
17. Land Acquisition Act 1960 (Revised 1992), consolidated text on CommonLII
18. HBA reprint of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974, Part V (s.83)
19. Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 (Act 133), text hosted by Perbadanan Putrajaya
20. Free Malaysia Today, 18 March 2025 — Penang's own urban renewal policy and the URA Mahsuri project
21. EdgeProp — Kuala Lumpur Local Plan 2040 gazetted; call for authority-led urban renewal
22. Henry Butcher Penang, 15 January 2024 — KPKT's urban renewal implementation guidelines (GPP PSB, 2023)
23. Bernama, 20 July 2026 — Johor allocates RM50 million to repaint 170 blocks / 11,693 units at 26 locations
24. Malay Mail, 23 September 2026 — Dewan Rakyat meeting 5 October to 8 December 2026 (Speaker Tan Sri Johari Abdul)
25. Malay Mail, 13 October 2023 — Budget 2024: en bloc sales to no longer need 100pc buy-in (PM Anwar's Budget speech)
26. HHQ — Budget 2024 real estate highlights (en bloc consent threshold announcement)

Verified: 2026-09-20. This guide is general information, not legal, tax or financial advice. Rules and rates change — confirm in writing with your lawyer, bank or the relevant authority before you sign.