Market
RBD Palm Olein
$1080
Soybean Oil — Chicago (CBOT)
$1,384
Soybean Oil — Dalian (DCE)
$1,304
Sunflower Oil — FOB St. Petersburg
$1,280
RBD Palm Olein
$1080
Soybean Oil — Chicago (CBOT)
$1,384
Soybean Oil — Dalian (DCE)
$1,304
Sunflower Oil — FOB St. Petersburg
$1,280
Advertise
NewsOils and Fats Sector Coverage

Malaysian Court Quashes Environmental Conviction Against FGV Palm Industries Over Effluent Discharge Allegations

Fats and oils processing
November 11, 2026
·
زيت النخيل أصبح وقودا لسيارات السباقات

A Malaysian Court of Appeal panel has overturned a previous conviction against FGV Palm Industries regarding the alleged illegal discharge of palm oil mill effluent (POME). The three-member bench, comprising Justices Azman Abdullah, Noorin Badaruddin, and Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid, allowed the company’s appeal, setting aside the guilty verdict and ordering a full refund of the RM18,000 fine previously paid by the firm.

The legal dispute stemmed from an incident on July 24, 2018, at the company's Selancar 2A mill located in Rompin, Pahang. FGV Palm Industries had been charged under Section 16(1) of the Environmental Quality Act for an alleged breach involving effluent discharge. The prosecution contended that a sample collected from the premises recorded a biochemical oxygen demand (BOD3) level of 130mg/l, which significantly exceeded the prescribed regulatory limit of 100mg/l.

The judicial history of the case involves multiple reversals. Initially, the sessions court acquitted the company at the end of the prosecution’s case, ruling that a prima facie case had not been established. However, following a successful appeal by the prosecution to the High Court, the company was ordered to enter its defence. At the conclusion of the defence proceedings, the sessions court found the company guilty and imposed the RM18,000 fine. This conviction was later upheld by the High Court, which simultaneously dismissed a cross-appeal by the prosecution seeking a review and potential increase of the sentence.

In allowing the final appeal, Justice Azman Abdullah stated that significant doubts had arisen regarding the integrity of the effluent samples collected by the Department of Environment. The court’s concerns centered on the protocols used for handling and preserving the samples before they were delivered to the Department of Chemistry for analysis, thereby questioning the reliability of the test results. Furthermore, the bench noted that the prosecution failed to produce rebuttal evidence to challenge the company’s own internal laboratory findings, which had recorded lower BOD3 readings within the legal threshold.

Representing FGV Palm Industries were counsels Habizan Rahman Habeeb Rahman, Sarina Alwi, and Hanif Asyraf Salleh, while deputy public prosecutor Aznin Ariff appeared for the prosecution.

Source: FMT