OFFICIAL PORTAL
PRIME MINISTER'S DEPARTMENT
NATIONAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT AGENCY

News

Johor rekod 19 kejadian gempa bumi sejak Ogos 2025

PETALING JAYA: Gempa bumi yang berlaku di perairan Batu Pahat, Johor kelmarin merupakan kejadian ke-19 direkodkan di sekitar negeri itu sejak kejadian pertama pada 23 Ogos 2025.

Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Meteorologi Malaysia (MetMalaysia), Dr. Mohd. Hisham Mohd. Anip berkata, peningkatan kekerapan gempa bumi di Johor sejak kebelakangan ini berkemungkinan disebabkan keaktifan gempa bumi serantau dan global yang saling memberi kesan antara satu sama lain.

Beliau berkata, berdasarkan rekod MetMalaysia, negeri-negeri di barat Semenanjung pernah merasai gegaran akibat gempa bumi di Sumatera, Indonesia, manakala daerah-daerah di timur Sabah pernah merasai gegaran akibat gempa bumi di Sulawesi, Indonesia dan Filipina.

Katanya, rakyat Malaysia tidak perlu bimbang kerana risiko bencana gempa bumi berskala besar di kawasan utama negara berada pada tahap sangat rendah.

Namun, beliau berkata, gegaran daripada gempa bumi kuat di Sumatera, Filipina dan Sulawesi lazimnya boleh dirasai di beberapa tempat di Malaysia, terutama di barat Semenanjung dan timur Sabah.

Mohd. Hisham berkata, kekuatan gegaran yang dirasai juga bergantung pada magnitud gempa, jarak sesuatu kawasan dari pusat gempa, kedalaman pusat gempa serta jenis batuan dan tanah.

“Gegaran daripada gempa yang berpusat pada kedalaman kurang 100 kilometer lebih kuat dirasai berbanding gempa yang pusatnya lebih dalam daripada 100 kilometer.

“Tanah lembut juga boleh menguatkan gelombang seismik di sepanjang laluannya.

“Secara umumnya, kejadian gempa bumi tidak boleh diramal lebih awal sebelum ia berlaku. Namun, kemungkinan untuk gempa bumi berlaku sentiasa ada,” katanya kepada Utusan Malaysia.

Semalam, media melaporkan gempa bumi lemah bermagnitud 4.4 berlaku di perairan Batu Pahat pada pukul 4.55 petang.

MetMalaysia berkata, gempa bumi itu berlaku pada koordinat 1.7 darjah Utara dan 102.7 darjah Timur, dengan pusat gempa terletak kira-kira 27 kilometer barat daya Batu Pahat pada kedalaman 10 kilometer.

Sementara itu, Pensyarah Kanan Fakulti Sains Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Dr. Mohd. Akhmal Muhamad Sidek berkata, gempa berlaku menunjukkan Semenanjung Malaysia mempunyai sesar yang boleh menghasilkan gempa bumi tempatan.

Menurutnya, gegaran daripada kejadian berkenaan turut dirasai di Melaka, Negeri Sembilan, Selangor dan Kuala Lumpur.

Beliau berkata, Malaysia secara relatif tidak terletak pada sempadan utama pertembungan plat tektonik, namun negara ini tidak bebas sepenuhnya daripada risiko gempa bumi.

“Mengenai kemungkinan kejadian berulang dalam masa terdekat, ia mungkin berlaku, tetapi masa, lokasi dan magnitud gempa tidak boleh diramal secara tepat.

“Selepas sesuatu gempa utama, gempa susulan boleh berlaku dalam tempoh beberapa jam, hari atau minggu. Lazimnya, kekerapannya semakin berkurang.

“Kita tidak boleh menyatakan bahawa satu lagi episod gempa besar akan berlaku dalam beberapa hari akan datang,” katanya. – UTUSAN

 

 

 

 

Nepal larang penduduk kembali ke kawasan banjir, 33,000 dijangka dipindahkan

KATHMANDU: Kira-kira 33,000 mangsa banjir di Nepal dijangka perlu ditempatkan semula dan tidak dibenarkan kembali ke kediaman asal mereka apabila kawasan terjejas diisytiharkan sebagai zon bahaya, lapor Kyodo News.

Ketua Pihak Berkuasa Pengurangan dan Pengurusan Risiko Bencana Kebangsaan, Dharam Raj Uprety, berkata kawasan yang mempunyai tanda paras banjir - sesetengah lokasi mencecah 13 meter lebih tinggi daripada paras sungai biasa - akan dikategorikan sebagai zon bahaya.

"Kami tahu ada kemungkinan akan berlaku bencana pada masa depan. Oleh itu, kami tidak mahu mengambil risiko lebih besar," katanya dalam temu bual eksklusif dengan Kyodo News, awal minggu ini.

Beliau berkata, kira-kira 33,000 penduduk terjejas akan dipindahkan ke kawasan lebih selamat.

Menurut Kerajaan Nepal, banjir dan aliran puing pada 26 Ogos lalu yang dicetuskan oleh runtuhan ais serta batu di kawasan tadahan hulu Lhende Khola di Tibet telah mengorbankan 1,451 mangsa.

Kira-kira 5,700 orang, termasuk lebih 600 warga asing, dilaporkan masih hilang di Nepal.

Uprety bagaimanapun mengaku ikatan sentimental penduduk terhadap tempat kelahiran dan kawasan yang didiami sepanjang hayat, menjadi cabaran untuk meyakinkan mereka supaya berpindah.

Namun, beliau berkata, pasukan pihak berkuasa itu, Jabatan Ukur dan kementerian berkaitan telah meninjau serta mengenal pasti kawasan lebih selamat berhampiran zon bahaya.

Langkah itu bertujuan membolehkan mangsa berpindah ke penempatan selamat dan meneruskan kehidupan dengan bermaruah.

Operasi mencari di beberapa terowong daripada 12 projek hidroelektrik yang terjejas akibat aliran puing runtuhan itu kini memasuki peringkat akhir.

Pihak berkuasa bercadang menamatkan operasi berkenaan pada hujung minggu ini sebelum beralih kepada usaha pemulihan pascabencana.

"Peluang untuk menjumpai mangsa masih hidup adalah amat tipis, malah hampir tiada," kata Uprety.

Kerajaan turut memutuskan untuk menyalurkan bantuan segera kira-kira AS$2,600 atau 400,000 rupee Nepal kepada setiap keluarga terbabit sebagai geran perumahan.

Selain itu, setiap keluarga hingga empat ahli akan menerima elaun bulanan AS$98 atau 15,000 rupee Nepal bagi menampung kos sara hidup dan sewa.

Bagi setiap ahli tambahan melebihi empat orang pula, bantuan tambahan sebanyak 2,000 rupee Nepal akan diberikan.

Pada awal bulan ini, kerajaan menganggarkan sebanyak AS$4.77 bilion diperlukan bagi usaha pemulihan awal, namun Uprety menyatakan jumlah sebenar dijangka meningkat.

Beliau berkata, anggaran awal itu tidak merangkumi kos pampasan perlu ditanggung kerajaan bagi tanah milik persendirian yang kini ditetapkan sebagai zon bahaya dan akan diambil alih kerajaan.

"Keperluan pemulihan akhir boleh dengan mudah mencecah dua kali ganda daripada anggaran awal," katanya.

Nepal yang berdepan kekangan kewangan, berharap sebahagian kos pemulihan itu dapat ditampung melalui bantuan rakan pembangunan termasuk Jepun, China, India, Britain, Bank Dunia dan Bank Pembangunan Asia.

 

 

 

 

Banyak wilayah Kalimantan Selatan berjerebu hari ini

JAKARTA: Sejumlah wilayah di Kalimantan Selatan berpotensi mengalami udara kabur hingga jerebu pada pagi Khamis.

Badan Meteorologi, Klimatologi dan Geofizik (BMKG) meramalkan potensi jerebu berlaku di Kota Banjarbaru, Banjarmasin, Kabupaten Banjar, Barito Kuala dan Tapin.

Jarak penglihatan terhad dijangka berlaku di daerah Hulu Sungai Tengah, Hulu Sungai Utara, Hulu Sungai Selatan, Tabalong, Balangan dan Tanah Laut.

Sementara itu, di daerah Kotabaru dan Tanah Bumbu, cuaca cerah berawan dijangka berlaku dari pagi hingga malam.

Hujan tidak lebat pula diramalkan berlaku pada sebelah petang di Tabalong dan Kotabaru. Hampir seluruh wilayah Kalimantan Selatan dijangka mengalami hujan tidal lebat pada sebelah petang.

Suhu udara dijangka antara 22 hingga 36 darjah Celsius, dengan kelembapan relatif antara 35 hingga 99 peratus. – AGENSI

Sarawak haze: Three stations record ‘Very Unhealthy’ API, 12 at ‘Unhealthy’ level

KUCHING (Sept 24): Three of Sarawak’s 21 air quality monitoring stations continued to record ‘Very Unhealthy’ readings at 1pm on Thursday, while another 12 remained at the ‘Unhealthy’ level, according to the Natural Resources and Environment Board’s (NREB) API Status for Sarawak.

Lundu, Kanowit and Serian continued to record ‘Very Unhealthy’ air quality, with Lundu posting the highest reading at 219 at 1pm, down from 223 at 8am. Kanowit remained unchanged at 216, while Serian fell from 218 to 210.

Among the 12 stations recording ‘Unhealthy’ air quality, Lubok Antu rose from 191 to 198, while Kuching eased slightly from 195 to 193. Tebedu remained unchanged at 194, while Samarahan fell from 188 to 185.

The other ‘Unhealthy’ readings were Belaga at 173, Betong 172, Sri Aman 170, Bintulu 166, Sibu and Samalaju (158 each), Sarikei 157 and Kapit 121.

Meanwhile, six stations recorded ‘Moderate’ air quality, with Mukah and Miri moving out of the ‘Unhealthy’ category. Mukah’s API dropped from 151 at 8am to 99 at 1pm, while Miri fell from 114 to 94.

The other ‘Moderate’ readings were Limbang at 86, ILP Miri 85, Lawas 81, and Bario 70.

Under the API classification, readings of 0-50 are Good, 51-100 Moderate, 101-200 Unhealthy, and 201-300 Very Unhealthy.

Department of Environment (DOE) deputy director-general (development) Azuri Azizah Saedon said the haze situation was occurring amid persistent dry weather in parts of the southern Asean region.

In a statement today, she cited the Asean Specialised Meteorological Centre’s (ASMC) Sept 23 report, which recorded 792 hotspots in Kalimantan and 75 in Sumatra. No hotspots were detected in Malaysia, including Sarawak.

Azuri said ASMC had also reported moderate transboundary smoke haze over northwestern Borneo, with moderate to thick smoke plumes observed from clusters of hotspots in Kalimantan and southern Sumatra.

She added that the DOE would continue monitoring fire risks, particularly in peatland areas and landfill sites, while strengthening inspections and patrols in areas vulnerable to open burning.

“The DOE will not compromise on any open burning found to have resulted from human activities, particularly where such activities contribute to deteriorating air quality,” she said.

Azuri also reminded the public that open burning offences under the Environmental Quality (Amendment) Act 2024 could carry fines ranging from RM25,000 to RM1 million, imprisonment of up to five years, or both.

The public is urged to refrain from open burning and report any fire or open burning incident to the Fire and Rescue Department through 999 or the DOE’s toll-free line at 1-800-88-2727.

 

 

 

 

 

Regional haze casts a pall on Asean’s influence

In recent weeks, a thick shroud of smoke has enveloped some Asean states again. While the bloc has instituted some policies to mitigate its effects, enforcement and making them work effectively is critical.

Early this month, haze from forest and peatland fires in Indonesia drifted as far as the southern Philippines. Closer to the source, visibility at Supadio Airport in Pontianak fell to about 100 metres, preventing the aircraft carrying Indonesia’s forestry minister from landing. Since August, the Asean Specialised Meteorological Centre has activated its highest alert level, Level 3, after detecting hotspots across Sumatra and Kalimantan. Malaysia has asked Indonesia permission to conduct cloud seeding over Indonesian territory. Singapore has also issued daily haze advisories to help the public plan activities and events.

The pattern is familiar. For nearly three decades, Asean has built mechanisms to prevent, monitor and respond to haze, yet the problem continues to occur. Asean introduced the Regional Haze Action Plan in 1997, focusing on prevention, mitigation and monitoring. In 2002, it adopted the Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution (AATHP), the region’s first legally-binding agreement dedicated to the issue. Since then, Asean has built a relatively comprehensive system for haze cooperation. The Asean Specialised Meteorological Centre (ASMC) monitors hotspots, weather conditions and smoke movement, while the AATHP provides a framework for joint responses and assistance when fires escalate.

The re-occurrence of smoke haze is an especially revealing test of Asean credibility because, unlike many of Asean’s other transboundary challenges, it is predominantly an intra-Asean problem. The countries where the fires start and the countries that breathe the smoke are, with few exceptions, the same member states. This distinguishes haze from a challenge like the water security in the Mekong River. The river is shared by several Asean countries but flows from China, which is not an Asean member. China’s dam-building and water management decisions have major implications for downstream communities and ecosystems, limiting Asean’s influence over some of the river’s most consequential decisions.

If haze, unlike the Mekong, is a problem Asean’s own members largely cause and largely suffer, it raises an obvious question: why has the region struggled to address it through its own institutions?

The challenge lies in a basic tension at the heart of Asean cooperation. Haze crosses borders, but individual member countries are largely responsible for their occurrence. The fires are largely concentrated mainly in Indonesia, where land use, plantation licensing, forest management and law enforcement are primarily domestic matters. Asean can share information, coordinate responses and provide assistance, but it has limited authority to direct or influence how a member state manages its own territory. This reflects Asean’s long-standing principle of non-interference, which is a double-edged sword: the principle has helped sustain cooperation among countries with different political systems, but which also restricts how far Asean can go in addressing a problem whose effects are shared across borders.

A second related constraint is attribution for liability. Asean has considerable technical capacity to detect hotspots and track the movement of smoke haze, but identifying the source of it is not the same as establishing legal responsibility. Determining who caused a fire requires land concession data, investigation and evidence that can support enforcement. These functions remain largely within national jurisdictions. In essence, Asean has far less capacity to determine who should be held responsible and face the consequences.

Singapore has sought to close this gap through its Transboundary Haze Pollution Act, which allows action against entities whose conduct outside Singapore causes or contributes to haze pollution in Singapore. The law tilts towards prevention and deterrence. During the severe 2015 haze, Singapore’s National Environment Agency used the Act, issuing preventive measure notices and information requests to several regional agribusiness and pulp-and-paper companies. The Act demonstrates the seriousness of the problem, but also illustrates the limits of relying on national measures to address a regional one: even where a country has legal powers to act, effective enforcement depends on access to information, cooperation from the source country and sufficient evidence to establish responsibility.

Corporate accountability highlights the same problem. Large plantation companies operate across large areas of forest and peatland, but a fire within or near a concession does not necessarily make them directly accountable. Holding a company responsible requires transparent concession maps, reliable fire monitoring tied to specific land parcels, credible investigation and enforcement capable of following the evidence to a corporate actor rather than a smallholder. These pertain to national functions, land registries, investigative agencies, courts and local security enforcement that Asean has no authority to build or command. Asean can facilitate regional information-sharing, but the decisive steps of investigation, prosecution and enforcement are the prerogatives of member states and remain outside the bloc’s direct control.

Forest and peatland fires will remain difficult to prevent, particularly as climate change brings longer and drier periods. But climate change should not become a scapegoat. Human activities and the strength of national institutions also shape the risk and severity of fires. Asean cannot substitute for national institutions responsible for land management, law enforcement and corporate accountability.

After nearly three decades of haze cooperation, the more important question is whether Asean has become better equipped to prevent, manage and mitigate the cross-border effects of fires. The region already has a legal framework, monitoring systems, coordination mechanisms and decades of experience responding to haze.

The challenge is making these mechanisms work more effectively. In managing transboundary haze, Asean’s credibility will ultimately depend on whether it can translate regional commitments into practical results. This could mean having common response protocols, compatible communication and data systems and regular joint exercises so that disaster-management agencies can work together more effectively. It would also mean agreeing in advance how information, equipment and personnel can be shared and deployed across borders when a major fire overwhelms national capacity. Ideally, this should happen way before the next haze crisis once again chokes the region.

Melinda Martinus is a Fellow at the ASEAN Studies Centre, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Disclaimer
The Government of Malaysia and the National Disaster Management Agency (NADMA) shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by the usage of any information obtained from this website.
Hubungi Kami
Agensi Pengurusan Bencana Negara (NADMA),
Jabatan Perdana Menteri,
Aras B1, 6 dan 7, Setia Perkasa 5,
Kompleks Setia Perkasa,
Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan,
62502 WP Putrajaya

T: +603 8870 4800
F: +603 8870 4848
E: admin@nadma.gov.my
G: 2.937323, 101.704762
Statistik Pengunjung

Search