More on the new window tint regulations, which has drawn a mixed reaction from the public since it was announced two days ago. The new guidelines allow the minimum visible light transmission (VLT) levels of the rear side windows and rear windscreen to be lowered beyond the 30% in place previously.
This potentially allows motorists to reduce the VLT levels of the rear windows and windscreen to zero, which the police isn’t happy about. The department says that the new ruling will make enforcement work tougher and could potentially affect the safety of its personnel, as officers will no longer be able to sight a car’s rear passengers during inspection.
What irks the police the most is that the complete absence of consultation on the matter. According to Bukit Aman department of investigation and traffic enforcement director deputy commissioner Datuk Azisman Alias, the police was not asked for its opinion on the new rules. “I feel disappointed. They could have discussed (with us) and considered our point of view,” he said yesterday.
Today, the transport ministry replied to that point and said the views of the police were taken into consideration, based on a workshop that was held in 2014. Transport minister Anthony Loke said that the police had contributed its views on the topic then, and these had been taken into account, The Star reports.
“Some supported our move, and some didn’t — we respect all their views, but what has been decided upon has already taken into account all considerations and factors to amend the ruling,” he said.
Loke explained that any changes made to the window tint regulations fell under the jurisdiction of the transport ministry, and any amendment to the ruling was made under the Road Transport Act, making it final.
The workshop in 2014, he added, decided on amending the allowed VLT level for rear windows from 50% to 30%. This resulted in regulations being updated in February 2016, when the Motor Vehicles (Prohibition of Certain Types of Glass) (Amendment) Rules 2016 replaced the previous 1991 rules.
While conceding that no recent workshop had been organised on the topic, he said the latest amendment to the ruling was based on following international regulations. Loke explained that UN ECE R43 regulations do not specify a VLT level for the rear windscreen and rear windows, and it is left to a member country to determine a percentage it feels is permissible.
“Some countries set the permissible VLT level for the rear at 25-35%, while some do not set a percentage at all. What we have decided on is in line with international regulations. For example, we are following Japan, which does not set a VLT percentage for the rear,” he said.
Loke also touched on the subject of darkening the vehicle completely, in which individuals can apply to reduce the VLT percentage of the front windscreen and front side windows below the regulated 70% and 50% level respectively for security and health reasons.
He said that despite there being revenue involved, not every application will result in approval. “Anyone can apply, but that does not mean it will get approved. We will assess what kind of risk the person has,” he said.
Loke said a committee had been set up to approve these applications. He explained that this was to ensure there was no power abuse by the transport minister or the director-general, especially as applicants have to pay RM5,000 fee for a two-year permit if approval is granted.
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
“follow Japan standard” Con-lan-firm Ah Loke is eagerly awaiting his Ministerial Alphard. For sure the tender will now be expedited.
In the past can easily cari makan because grey rules, now day difficult… Sure not happy lah…
Yup, VVIP can but normal citizen can’t do the same in the past ruling. Now JPJ and PDRM boss not happy lettew…
How many VVIPs on the road compared to every Tom, Dick & Harry who is allowed to tint super dark now?
Its called situational awareness. The more u have, the faster u can anticipate, the earlier u can react, the safer u remain. Comprendere?
Tiada bukti cermin gelap tingkat jenayah.Of course there is no evidence, its not yet allowed in 2014.
I really pity the officer as my line of work will involve them esp when things get messy. These normal policeman is laying their life all the time on duty. No need to make it harder for them.
Bro it’s not like criminals can’t tint their car before this. No logic to this argument. At least now it’s regulated, which criminal is going to register their name and pay 5k? It’s actually easier to track down criminals with the approved tint sticker pass
Betui! Now this is an example of someone who put his thinking hat on rather than those useless bashers.
“For example, we are following Japan, which does not set a VLT percentage for the rear,” he said.
Yet, the Japanese manufacturer never put rear windows VLT at 0%
Really digging into all archives for support.
Digging the barrel bottom, looking for excuses. Lolz!
Just maintain the previous 70/50/30
Anyone wanna apply for darker ones, go ahead.
Charge them 15k per year. Permit placed in car and must show anytime jpj asked for it. Done!
I think they can still increase it to 75-80/50/30, but definitely not 100/50/30
Its true if too dark tint can endanger police personnel. Can take example, if police spots suspicious dark tinted car, who knows the criminal in the dark tinted car have gun n simply shoot at the police. Criminal would do anything desperately just to avoid arrest, more worse if they high on drug. No need say allowed darker tints, since lastime criminal already tints dark their car for crime purpose. We never know. To prevent is better than to cure. Sediakan payumg sebelum hujan. Safety 1st and priority.
Safety First! Unfortunately many forumers don’t take this seriously and giving excuses to support this stupid idea. There is no excuses or reason to compromise safety!
what a joke
its more difficult for driver to see car in front(second car) did braking because front car(first car) has 0% VLT tints.
0% VLT: ME —> 1st Car 2nd Car
30% VLT: ME —> 1st Car —> 2nd Car (can see brake light)
When you are driving, you always see through the first car? And not keep your safe driving distance?
Is this what the driving school teach?
Keeping a distance is important, but being able to see what’s in-front of the car is equally important to be able to anticipate what’s happening upfront. That’s how you avoid from getting involved in fender-bender especially during high traffic.
Also, please define what is safe distance on a high traffic period?
My driving school teaches me to be aware of my surroundings and see as far possible, including paying attention in looking through the windows of car ahead to spot brake light activation for the simple reason, I may not know if the brake lights of the car ahead of me are working! So I should be prepared to brake in tandem with cars ahead of me and not rely on the car in front of me.
lol, driving school said see further away from the car to anticipate emergency……not just seeing the car in front.
Nope. But it do help when u can see through the front car rear window.
So how do you drive behind vans, pickups, busses and lorries?
Lol! There’s a difference between an open interpretation international regulation and not having any legal limits. Clearly Anthony has no experience nor knowledge in dealing with international regulations and laws.
Rather than digging himself into an even deeper hole and making himself sound not so clever, better he seek a lawyer that has extensive knowledge in working with international laws and regulations before making hasty press statements such as above.
If u are so clever, tell us what is the difference between the MY and JP regulation?
Copy paste: “International standards doesn’t mean suitable here, and what is the so-called international standards by the way? Every country having different standard, so what is international? Germany International autobahn highway no speed limit, why not we follow this international standard?”
Just a very quick Google search.
Japan doesn’t allow front window tints. Do you want to implement here?
Japan laws also only allowed 70% VLT tinting limit to front side windows. Do you want to implement here?
You will cry with these rules here.
Lol. This minister is the proverbial frog under the coconut shell.
Worst than menteri kasut.
Now I wonder what the Gov bashers are going to say?
PH Government is more concerned on making money than ensuring safety of road users. No safety at all!
Err, how about no. You can’t fool us anymore.
oops ph..just another oops
International Standard doesn’t mean it’s suitable here. Malaysia is a tropical country with high rainfall throughout the year. Imagine you have to rely on the two side mirrors while driving at night during heavy rainfalls. Why is this tint is so important? Can’t expose sunlight, made from the candle?
Malaysia is also a tropical country with high exposure to sunlight. In fact, it has more sunlight than rain throughout the year. People especially with hatchback cars always complaint of heat. This regulation only applies to the rear windscreen and rear windows, so where is the concern of can’t see through side mirrors?
like i said, does sunlight kill you immediately? accident does!
Yeah, tell that to those past rulers with dark tint cars.
Yes, your are right.
International standards doesn’t mean suitable here, and what is the so-called international standards by the way? Every country having different standard, so what is international? Germany International autobahn highway no speed limit, why not we follow this international standard?
I strongly disagree with this new regulations, mainly for safety purposes. Most drivers are incompetent enough, this will just make things worse.
Most of Malaysian roads are poorly lit, very poor lighting even in towns, can you imagine much darker front windscreen or side windscreen, how are they going to see motorcycles with very dim lighting?
I had seen an idiot friend with super dark tints, when he cross the road at night, he wind down his side window…
You get what I mean in regards to safety???
So people who are competent, good drivers have to put up with regulations meant for incompetent drivers?
What logic is that?
If drivers are incompetent in driving, they should not be driving and their license must be revoked!
This is MY. We are so used to past ruling standard that we think it is normal. To compensate for the incompetent like giving special rights to native people.
when there is rules not allowed to have black tinted, JPJ not chatch. now offer people to have black tinted with some $$$. prove that Malaysia with $$$ can settle every thing.
JPJ not catch is a problem started from the past ruling, nothing Loke can do unless you want him to sack them for being lazy.
Black tint has existed for a long time for people with $$$ and Power, like the VVIP on his Alphard. Now the normal citizen can apply. Don’t think it is anything new.
If he should fire anyone, it should be himself for being incompetent, stubbornly ignorant, yet too prideful to understand, and for not being concerned on road safety.
Go forward with it as long as the drivers can manage the poorer visibility at night and be safe on the road. As for police engagement… Well, revise the protocol to stay safe if needed. Guns behind door panels are not visible as well.
That is what most lame malaysians dont understand. They think what hey can see is what that is all there.
Dark tint or no dark tint, Police must always be steps ahead to ensure their own safety.
SOP’s are to be improved/changed.
how many time need to say, is not how dark the tint to protect the UV. is the quality of the tint.
Continue to say! Because it doesn’t get into his thick skull! Continue to drill until he gets it!
Kind of stretching the term, ‘following the international regulations’ aren’t you Bro? Just by reading this; “it is left to a member country to determine a percentage it feels is permissible” it doesn’t mean the regulations allowed any vehicle to have pitch black tint, only that the regs left it open to individual countries in deciding what is best minimum VLT suited for themselves.
The international regulators fully expects the decision makers, in this case the Government of Malaysia, to carry out due diligence and consultations with all parties, foremost the police and other authorities, when formulating the VLT levels. Obviously, Bro you have absolutely failed in carrying out your duties and now find somebody to blame for your incompetence. The police had given their views back in 2014. Yeah and you choose to ignore them? How does that work Bro? That’s not seeking consultation, that’s ignoring them!
I can think of another Anthony that can teach this Anthony a thing or two about what is international regulations and how’d they work.
How many reports there need to be for such meaningless arguments?
For those who kept being keyboard warriors, please rip off your front tint first before you even consider replying.
So you don’t mind if I HYPOTHETICALLY ram my truck into your car because oh, I cannot see you properly due to my black as midnight tint. So sorry, but it’s not my fault. They allowed me to tint kaw black, you see.
If you can’t see, go check your eyes… and your brain too if you can afford it.
Does it even occur to anyone a not so dark tint actually helps the person driving behind the tinted car actually be able to see a few cars ahead to anticipate a sudden brake!
It’s people who thinks like that who do not keep a safe distance from the car in front.
The 2 second rule is non existent in Malaysia.
That’s why when there is an accident on the highway, it’s usually a multiple car pile-up.
Some here just dun geddit. Maybe they dun drive deswai.
What do you mean tiada bukti?
Are you suggesting we do the necessary findings and present to you? You can’t keep moving the goal post just to suit your interest. We don’t need bukti to address public concern on tinting. But what you speak outside needs bukti.
It is deeply concerning if you can’t see the difference.
When they have supporters and sycophant followers (I see many here) heaping mountains of praises onto them, they are blinded to the obvious. Sad it happened so soon into their reign.
thats a pretty poor response from the transport ministry. discussed with the police in 2014? that’s bending the truth a little too far. please admit your shortfall! no limits on the rear window tint is not following international standards! and please dont quote some odd country that is doing it as a precedent. i stand with the police being disappointed. thumbs down anthony loke
Anthony Loke, you thought every car comes with Autonomous Emergency Brake (AEB). With 0% tinted, might causing more accidents happened, especially at night.
Really disappointed with the move, even below 30% already consider dark at night!!
Hahaha…. rakyat Malaysia hidup dalam “KEGELAPAN”
1.Make it an offence to tint Third Brake Light, 2.Make it unlawful to drive 100% Tinted vehicles after Maghrib (Get another car ! Original reason was solar-sensitive !) 3.Encourage front-camera display-panel at rear of box-truck & tinted cars.
Make it an offence to smoke all lights while you’re at it.
Agreed. Now with police escort, Loke has forgotten how the general public drives on the road. He doesn’t think it is aproblem for him but he forgtten it is a big problem for us regular road users. Thumbs down Loke.
Whether tint darker or not also kena bashed!!! Not easy to become Gov…everyone have their own opinion not everyone can be pleased..the pro on darker tinted glass is to avoid confrontation and road bully cox both of them cant see each other face and not to mention the finger too..so no tension!!hahaa…
And why not. The implication is very clear to us all, darker tints lead to difficulty in seeing ahead. This will lead to an increase in accident rates and likely mortality as well. Shouldn’t we be worried when the Government is more concerned about making money than ensuring safety.
The implication of people bashing this is clear, they do not keep a safe distance between vehicles. Darker tints DOES NOT lead to difficulty in seeing ahead. What happens when it is a lorry or bus, can you see ahead? Nope. You keep a safe distance.
Every government makes money, it is how they use it is more of a concern. For personal use like the previous or for the development of the country like the current?