PETALING JAYA: Negri Sembilan’s Mentri Besar and its state executive council has no power to remove or declare vacant the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar says the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC).
The AGC said any attempt to do so is unconstitutional and the validity and legal effect of such a proclamation must be determined through the constitutional and legal processes provided under the Laws of the Constitution of Negri Sembilan 1959 (UUTKNS 1959).
It was referring to a proclamation on April 19, 2026, to remove Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir from his position under Article 10 of UUTKNS 1959 that was supposedly signed and sealed by the lawful Undang.
The proclamation also sought to recognise Tuanku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar as the new Yang di-Pertuan Besar with immediate effect.
The AGC said the proclamation was invalid as it had failed to comply with the mandatory requirements under Article 10 of the state Constitution.
In particular, it said there was no evidence that any of the disqualifying grounds under Article 10(1) applied to Tuanku Muhriz.
“Although it is clear that the Undang have the power to take action to remove the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negri Sembilan from the throne, Article 10 also provides for procedures and grounds for consideration before such a decision can be made.
“To date, there are no facts showing that the prescribed procedures have been complied with,” it said in a statement yesterday.
The AGC also raised concerns over the status of some of the Undang who signed the April 19 proclamation, claiming that some had no longer held their positions lawfully after being removed according to customary rules in their respective Luaks.
“The composition of the Four Undang was incomplete at the material time of the proclamation.
“As such, the media statement or announcement by members of the Negri Sembilan State Executive Council is considered to have no legal effect, as they do not have jurisdiction, authority or power under the UUTKNS 1959 to make such an announcement.
“There is also no legal basis for members of the State Executive Council to rely on the proclamation dated April 19, 2026 for their announcement,” it added.
The AGC added that gazetting or any action to implement the proclamation constitutes an invalid and unconstitutional act.
“The department urges all parties to respect the court process and allow it to be resolved in an orderly manner,” it said.
Meanwhile, legal experts also concurred with the view taken by the AGC.
The power to remove the Ruler rests with the Undang Yang Empat, says Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi.
However, this is subject to substantive and procedural requirements under Articles 10 and 11.
As things stand, there are questions over the Undang who made the decision to oust the Ruler.
“The exco, appointed by the Ruler, has absolutely no power, either under the Negri Sembilan Constitution or under the Negri Sembilan adat to dethrone the Ruler,” he said.
Shad Saleem said the presence of Sungai Ujong Undang Datuk Seri Mubarak Dohak – who was removed from the post earlier – during the decision-making process invalidates the decision as he was no longer legally qualified to participate.
“Three qualified Undang can make the decision. But the point is, it was three plus one. Here, the plus one was disqualified.
“In administrative law, the principles of ultra vires and natural justice would apply. A disqualified person cannot sit to hear a case. Even though the rest may have agreed with him, you cannot say the decision is valid, because there is one disqualified person on the membership,” he said.
In a statement on Wednesday, the state exco had recognised Tuanku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar as the Yang di-Pertuan Besar in place of Tuanku Muhriz.
The exco claimed the decision was made during a meeting chaired by Mentri Besar Datuk Ismail Lasim on Tuesday.
They said an April 19 proclamation removing Tuanku Muhriz under Article 10 of the state laws had been signed and sealed by the lawful Undang, and became complete when Ismail signed it on Aug 3.
However, the current Dewan Keadilan dan Undang (DKU) has announced that Tuanku Muhriz remains the legitimate Yang di- Pertuan Besar.
Shad Saleem also added that no grounds had been specified or given for the removal of Tuanku Muhriz.
The Ruler, he said, must be allowed to respond through an inquiry.
“The grounds for removal are, for example, insanity or behaviour totally against the Sharia, or under the Constitution, if the ruler is being prosecuted for a crime. None of these grounds are mentioned,” he said.
Shad Saleem said Mentri Besar Datuk Ismail Lasim’s claim that his Aug 3 confirmation of a proclamation was done under duress also raised questions.
“On these grounds, there is procedural violation. As such, the Sept 16 announcement is illegal and of no effect,” he said.
Similarly, senior lawyer Andrew Khoo said the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar was exclusively governed by the Undang Yang Empat, with the exco having no constitutional role.
“Tuanku Muhriz remains the true legal and constitutional Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negri Sembilan. The issue here is also whether the April 19 proclamation is valid. The DKU met on July 31, 2026, and declared that the proclamation was unconstitutional and contravened Article 10, and was therefore null, void and of no legal effect,” he said.
Law lecturer Dr Muhammad Fathi Yusof said the priority now should be to resolve the constitutional and administrative deadlock.
“Article 10 gives the Undang Yang Empat a role in matters concerning the termination of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar’s position, while Article 11 concerns the selection of a successor.
“The exco does not take over the powers of the Undang. The question that remains open to debate is whether all substantive and procedural requirements in exercising that power have been fulfilled,” he said.
