KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 17 — The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) said the Negeri Sembilan state executive council’s media statement or announcement has no legal effect as its members had no jurisdiction, authority or power under the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959 to make it.
The AGC said there was also no legal basis for the state executive council members to rely on the April 19, 2026 proclamation for their announcement, adding that any move to gazette or implement the proclamation would be invalid and unconstitutional.
In a statement today, the AGC said it had taken note of the document titled “Media Statement of the Negeri Sembilan State Executive Council — Decision of the Negeri Sembilan State Executive Council Meeting No. 6 of 2026 (September 15, 2026)”.
It said the Menteri Besar and state executive council did not have unilateral power to terminate or declare vacant the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, while the validity and effect of the proclamation must be determined through a valid constitutional and legal process, particularly under the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959.
The AGC said it had previously given the preliminary view that the April 19 proclamation was invalid because it did not comply with the mandatory requirements under Article 10 of the state constitution, particularly as there was no evidence that any of the disqualifying factors under Article 10(1) applied to Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir.
It said although the Datuk-Datuk Undang have the power to take action to remove the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, Article 10 also provides the procedures and grounds for consideration before such a decision can be made.
“To date, there are no facts indicating that the prescribed procedures have been complied with,” it said.
The AGC also said an issue had arisen over whether some of the Datuk-Datuk Undang who signed the proclamation were lawfully holding office, as they had been removed according to the customary practices of their respective luak.
“The validity of several Undang who signed the proclamation is disputed because their removal was carried out according to the customs of their respective luak,” it said.
“Therefore, the composition of the Undang Yang Empat was in fact incomplete at the material time,” it added.
The AGC said it respected the position of the Datuk-Datuk Undang and acknowledged that the appointment and removal of each of them were subject to the customary rules of their respective luak.
It said the 1959 state constitution also provides for the establishment of the Dewan Undangan dan Keadilan, with Article 16 placing matters concerning Malay customs, including the selection, appointment, placement and removal of Undang, as well as matters brought by the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, under the Dewan’s jurisdiction.
Under Article 16(3), it said, the Dewan’s advice on such matters is final and cannot be challenged or questioned in any court on any grounds.
The AGC also said the matter was currently before the High Court of Malaya in Seremban and that an interlocutory injunction remained in force.
It urged all parties to respect the court process and allow the matter to be resolved in an orderly manner.
.jpg)
