KUALA LUMPUR – The Section Five Petaling Jaya Residents’ Association (RA) is considering internal action, including issuing a formal notice to a dog owner, following a viral incident involving a Great Dane that allegedly entered a neighbour’s home and attacked other pets in the early hours of Monday.
The incident is understood to have occurred when the large breed dog allegedly broke into the home of prominent lawyer Derek Fernandez, who later lodged a police report.
Fernandez claimed the dog entered his house at about 12.20am and attacked his smaller mixed-breed dogs, forcing him to intervene. He also alleged that the animal damaged his gate during the incident and said he used a stick to defend his pets before the owner arrived and removed the dog.
The case went viral after images of the injured Great Dane circulated online, initially prompting accusations of animal abuse against Fernandez.
However, animal rights group Reform AWA later said the situation appeared to involve defensive action and possible negligence by the dog’s owner.
Speaking to Scoop, RA chairman Tunku Johan Mansur said the association’s priority is neighbourhood safety and that the incident has raised ongoing concerns about uncontrolled large dogs in the area.
“Our primary mission is the safety of all residents,” he said, adding that the RA oversees community security arrangements in the neighbourhood.
While acknowledging it has no enforcement powers, Tunku Johan said the RA is looking at internal steps, including formally notifying the dog owner.
“We will write to the owner and ask him to take this matter more seriously because it is not the first time,” he said.
He stressed that the RA is not blaming the animal but is concerned about repeated incidents involving the dog allegedly being allowed to roam without a leash or supervision.
“I do not blame the dog,” he said, adding that owners of large breeds have a responsibility to ensure proper training and control.
Tunku Johan said enforcement ultimately lies with the authorities, noting that such cases often require formal complaints before action is taken.
“From a legalistic point of view, we leave it to the authorities. Unfortunately, it often requires something to happen before action is taken,” he said.
He added that the RA has received multiple complaints previously, but most were handled informally through advice rather than formal escalation.
“We are not an authority. Our role is to ensure common sense prevails and the neighbourhood remains safe,” he said.
Tunku Johan said the association will deliberate internally before deciding on next steps, including formal engagement with the dog owner.
“We will take steps to officially notify the owner that this is a potential hazard,” he said.
He added that the issue has been amplified on social media, cautioning that some narratives may have misrepresented the incident.
“The public is being misled in some ways, and that does not reflect the full picture,” he said.
Meanwhile, when contacted by Scoop, the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) outlined that enforcement in such cases falls under its dog licensing and by-law framework, alongside possible involvement from the Department of Veterinary Services (DVS).
The council said action is guided under the Dog Licensing and Dog Breeding House By-Laws (MBPJ) 2007, which includes By-law 14 on failure to leash or control a dog, By-law 15 on dog attacks, and potentially By-law 16 for dangerous dogs.
It said offences under these provisions may carry penalties upon conviction of a fine of up to RM2,000, imprisonment of up to one year, or both.
However, MBPJ stressed that enforcement is generally triggered by complaints and depends on the severity of the incident.
“The first thing we check is whether the dog has a valid licence,” the council said, adding that it will also assess whether the animal was allowed to roam without a leash.
MBPJ said it may issue summonses for by-law breaches but noted its powers are limited unless there is a serious public safety incident, particularly involving human victims.
“We may issue a summons if there is a violation, but our powers are limited unless there is a direct human attack or a more serious public safety issue,” MBPJ said.
It also confirmed that even viral cases are not automatically investigated unless a formal complaint is lodged.
“If there is no complaint lodged, we generally will not pursue the matter further, even if there are viral videos circulating. Our jurisdiction is based on formal complaints and by-law enforcement,” it said.
On animal welfare concerns, the council said cruelty investigations fall under the DVS, while cases without clear evidence of abuse may be treated as civil matters outside the council’s direct enforcement scope. – May 8, 2026