WHEN toxic waste is dumped and the polluter vanishes, who pays to clean it up? In the US a multibillion-dollar Superfund exists for precisely that scenario. In Malaysia, there is no equivalent safety net — only enforcement orders, court processes and in some cases, silence.
The US Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, provides a dedicated trust fund to finance the cleanup of abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites when polluters cannot be found or are unable to pay.
Reuben Andrew Muni, climate and energy campaigner with Greenpeace Philippines, said Malaysia manages toxic waste primarily through the Environmental Quality Act 1974 (Act 127) and the Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations 2005.
These laws regulate the “cradle-to-grave” management of hazardous materials. Act 127 also serves as the main legal instrument for addressing contaminated land and illegal toxic waste, enforced by the Environment Department (DOE). The director-general of the DOE is empowered to issue cleanup notices requiring landowners or occupiers to remediate pollution, even if they were not the original polluters.
In 2021, the DOE issued the Contaminated Land Management and Control Guidelines, establishing a risk-based framework for site assessment, screening levels adapted from United States Environmental Protection Agency standards and remediation protocols. The framework adopts the Polluter Pays Principle, placing financial and operational responsibility on identified polluters, landowners or site operators.
However, Malaysia does not operate a pre-funded public mechanism to address sites where responsible parties cannot be identified or are unable to pay. In such cases, remediation relies on enforcement actions, ad hoc government allocations or case-specific measures, rather than a dedicated central fund.
“Malaysia could benefit from strengthening its financial and institutional mechanisms for contaminated site remediation,” Muni said.
He added that while a proactive funding system could support systematic monitoring and faster response, directly replicating the US Superfund model may not be suitable without adapting it to Malaysia’s administrative context.
He highlighted timeliness as a key concern.
“Enforcement can be delayed when polluters are insolvent, unidentified or contest liability. A dedicated fund could allow immediate containment and site assessment while legal responsibility is being determined,” he added.
Accountability would also be critical. A transparent fund financed through levies on scheduled waste generators, industrial licensing fees or environmental bonds could ensure resources are available regardless of a polluter’s financial status or traceability.
This would be particularly relevant for abandoned industrial sites or illegal dumping grounds that pose long-term risks to water sources, including groundwater and to public health.
Any future framework, particularly for managing e-waste contamination, would need to be integrated with existing DOE enforcement capacity. Governance safeguards would be necessary to prevent misuse and to ensure funds are prioritised for high-risk sites affecting vulnerable communities.
Public access to contamination data and mandatory corporate environmental due diligence, including ESG disclosures, could further strengthen oversight without requiring a full legislative overhaul, he said.