We came across a pair of posts on the social media platform X on the following topic (1, 2):

The posts suggest that the Putra Heights fire in Puchong, Malaysia, that was caused by a leaking natural gas pipeline, was due to poor construction. One post was written in English, while the other was written in Chinese.

The Chinese post had accrued hundreds of thousands of views and a large number of shares, likes and responses. In contrast, the post in English had only gained 26 views at the time of writing.

The posts claim that the pipeline was built as part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), an infrastructure project launched in 2013 by Chinese leader XI Jinping that includes a collection of investment and development initiatives across the world seen by some as an extension of Chinese economic and political power.

What the News Reports Say

We took a look at the news articles that reported on the fire and found no evidence to support the alleged link between the pipeline and the quality of construction or BRI.

News reports instead described the pipeline as being under the ownership of Petronas, Malaysia’s state-owned oil and gas company.

Early news reports relayed suspicions from residents in the area that the fire may have been due to unauthorised construction works and digging on the Petronas-owned land above the pipeline, specifically pointing to the development of a row of shophouses in the area.

Meanwhile, the latest news reports indicated that Malaysian police and the Department of Occupational Safety and Health had begun investigating the cause of the gas pipeline explosion, while the Malaysian Fire and Rescue Department and Petronas are also expected to begin inspections and investigations.

While police have begun probing the contractor that had been building the development above the pipeline, there is no indication that a conclusion has been reached on the cause of the fire at the time of writing.

BRI Gas Pipelines in Malaysia

As there was no evidence that the ruptured pipeline was related to BRI, we conducted a search on BRI projects in Malaysia to confirm if there were any such links.

Our search revealed that while there were three pipeline projects that could be tied to BRI, these pipelines had all been cancelled following the collapse of the government led by Najib Razak, who was responsible for agreeing to several of the projects.

Suspicions that the projects were agreed under dubious terms, such as inflated costs and a desire to cut costs in order to reduce the government’s debt following the revelation of the scandal involving the state fund 1MDB led the new incoming prime minister Mahathir to cancel all three pipeline projects.

A closer look also revealed that these pipelines are unlikely to be the same pipeline in Puchong that was involved in the fire. Descriptions of the pipelines suggest that one of them was not described as an oil and gas pipeline but rather as a pipeline to link Melaka to a refinery and petrochemical plant in Johor.

Of the two pipelines described as oil and gas pipelines, one, the Trans-Sabah Gas Pipeline (TSGP) was a pipeline located in Sabah, East Malaysia. The other, the Multi-Product Pipeline (MPP), was meant to run from Melaka to Kedah, but was described as running through ‘uninhabited areas’ unlike the Puchong pipeline, which injured at least 145 people and led to more than 305 people displaced according to recent reports. We did not find any evidence that these projects had continued following their cancellation.

Surfacing of False Claims, Finger-Pointing

Given the scale of the disaster in the fire at Putra Heights, there have been a number of allegations seeking to apportion blame for the incident.

Organisations such as Indah Water Konsortium, Malaysia’s national sewage company, have had to deny any relation to the fire amid a swell in speculation around the cause.

Scepticism over opinions shared by experts, such as one suggesting the cause was due to soil moisture causing corrosion, have also heightened public doubt.

Malaysian authorities have called on the public not to spread fake news or unverified information, and to refer instead to official statements given by the authorities.

We could find no evidence to support the claim that poor construction on the pipeline due to it being built under BRI was the cause of the incident. Instead, the claim appears to be one amongst many that has arisen due to uncertainty over the cause of the fire, though investigations have yet to conclude.

As such, we find this claim to be highly likely to be false.