OPINION | What is the Home Minister, the IGP and the AG waiting for? Why the silence and inaction?

Malaysia's #1 Content Aggregator


OPINION | What is the Home Minister, the IGP and the AG waiting for? Why the silence and inaction?

26 Sep 2026 • 9:00 PM MYT

FLK
Used to do a bit of work in corporate restructuring, corporate `undertaker

Utusan Malaysia: https://www.utusan.com.my/terkini/2021/12/gagal-hadir-warga-emas-dikenakan-waran-tangkap/


In Feb 2026, HRH the Sultan of Selangor called for a complete end to pig farming in the state, citing its environmental impact and Selangor’s demographic make-up.

In Apr 2026, during the debate on the state ruler’s royal address, Seri Kembangan assemblyperson proposed that Selangor adopt a modern, closed-house pig farming system, including zero-discharge processes and biogas recycling technologies.



As expected, opposition lawmakers, immediately jumped into action calling her speech


an affront to the Sultan’s decree prohibiting pig farming in the state.


A lawmaker from PAS reportedly chided the Seri Kembangan assemblyperson asking her to respect the royal decree and the institution of the constitutional monarchy and do not hide behind technical terms to revive something clearly rejected by the state.



Moving forward to the present.


The crisis in Negeri Sembilan appears to continue unabated at the present juncture at the time of this article.


On 20 Sept 2026, the ruler of Negeri Sembilan state, Tuanku Muhriz, through a statement issued by the Istana, revoked the appointments of members of the state executive council (Exco)with immediate effect.


On the same day, the Mentri Besar of Negeri Sembilan openly defied the decision of the Yang Di Pertuan Besar, declaring publicly that Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir's decision to revoke the appointments of 10 state executive council (exco) members is unconstitutional and legally void without the menteri besar's advice.



Adding to the tit for tat action between the office of the Yang di Pertuan Besar and the Mentri Besar, the Exco subsequently suspended the state secretary and state legal adviser from their duties.


As how the lawmaker from PAS reportedly chided the Seri Kembangan assemblyperson, the Mentri Besar of Negeri Sembilan and the Exco should respect the royal decree and the institution of the constitutional monarchy and do not hide behind technical terms to revive something clearly rejected by the state.



If the PAS lawmaker categorised the Seri Kembangan assemblyperson speech as disrespecting the institution of the constitutional monarchy, the actions of the Mentri Besar and the Exco in Negeri Sembilan presently are not only disrespecting but clearly was made with the objctive of replacing the Yang di Pertuan Besar.


Sedition is the crime of using speech, writing, or actions to encourage people to rebel or rise up against their government.


Treason is the crime of betraying one's country or government, typically by attempting to overthrow it or by helping its enemies.



Are the actions of the Mentri Besar and the State Exco treasonous?


What is the Home Minister, the IGP and the AG waiting for?

 

Wherever PAS goes, Gerakan and MIPP will follow, say analysts

Wherever PAS goes, Gerakan and MIPP will follow, say analysts

2 hours ago

Minderjeet Kaur

They say the two parties are likely to stay with PAS if PN is deregistered, as they may have better chances of contesting seats in GE16.

An analyst said the decision by Gerakan and MIPP to stay put in PN suggests that they are more comfortable remaining alongside PAS than aligning themselves with Bersatu.

PETALING JAYA:

Perikatan Nasional may lose its name and logo if it is eventually deregistered, but component members Gerakan and the Malaysian Indian People’s Party (MIPP) are unlikely to stray far from PAS, say political analysts.

Universiti Sains Malaysia’s Sivamurugan Pandian said both parties are likely to remain with PAS if the Islamic party gives them sufficient electoral space and political identity.

Sivamurugan Pandian.

Sivamurugan said Gerakan and MIPP would probably prefer PN to survive, but could follow PAS into a new political vehicle if the coalition was deregistered.

“They would like to keep PN, but if Bersatu leans towards PH, the advantage is for Bersatu to keep PN if PN is not deregistered.

“If that is the scenario, PAS, Wawasan, Gerakan and MIPP may activate MN as a new coalition,” he said, referring to Muafakat Nasional.

The Registrar of Societies has suspended PN following a notice issued to the coalition seeking an explanation of a complaint lodged by Bersatu.

RoS said the suspension, which took effect on Sept 23, was intended to safeguard PN’s interests and prevent it from continuing to breach its rules.

New coalition if PN goes

Lau Zhe Wei.

Lau Zhe Wei of International Islamic University Malaysia said the relationship among the PN parties mattered more than the coalition’s formal structure.

“Even if PN was dissolved, it would not be a problem. They could simply form another coalition under a different name and recreate the same structure.

“If there is not enough time to establish a new coalition before an election, they could contest under another party’s flag, most likely PAS, or perhaps Wawasan,” he said.

Lau said the decision by Gerakan and MIPP to stay put in PN suggested that they were more comfortable remaining alongside PAS than aligning themselves with Bersatu.

“If Gerakan or MIPP were genuinely closer to Bersatu and wanted to remain with it, they could leave PN and form another grouping or simply align themselves with Bersatu.

“But that has not happened in recent months. They appear comfortable remaining in PN or, in other words, alongside PAS,” he said.

PAS holds key to smaller parties’ future

Wong Chin Huat.

Sunway University’s Wong Chin Huat said the smaller parties were unlikely to dictate what a post-PN arrangement would look like.

“The simple answer is that MIPP and Gerakan don’t matter. They don’t decide. PAS and Wawasan decide.

“If PAS and Wawasan decide to field their candidates in the coming Melaka election, they will get to contest as part of the PAS bloc. Very likely, they would contest under PAS’s flag,” he said.

Wong said any deregistration of PN will essentially have only one effect: the logo used for PN candidates, likely to be replaced by PAS’s, which might have lesser appeal to a tiny segment of the electorate.

Advertisement

Advertisement

He said Gerakan and MIPP’s choices would ultimately be guided by electoral necessity.

“Gerakan and MIPP are rational players. They don’t love PAS, Wawasan or Bersatu. They love whichever party can deliver them votes because these parties can’t deliver votes themselves.

“PN’s deregistration doesn’t affect their chances of being fielded. That’s decided by PAS and Wawasan’s strategic calculations,” he said.

OPINION | "Treason, Treason!" – What Happens When Politicians Try To “Overthrow” A Ruler…?!!

Malaysia's #1 Content Aggregator


OPINION | "Treason, Treason!" – What Happens When Politicians Try To “Overthrow” A Ruler…?!!

26 Sep 2026 • 9:30 AM MYT

JK Joseph
Repentant ex-banker who believes in truth, compassion and some humour

Wasn't the new Negeri Sembilan Menteri Besar from UMNO sworn in by the same current ruler Tuanku Muhriz whom his party is now attempting to replace? Credit Image: Malay Mail (Bernama pic)


​God forbid, but if politicians are allowed to ‘oust’ a ruler, imagine what else they might do!


Amid the disturbing happenings in Negeri Sembilan, where the current ruler is being allegedly forced to abdicate the throne, the question many may be asking is this: are politicians now above the monarchy and the laws of the land?


​It looks like the rollercoaster UMNO-Negeri Sembilan royal crisis has taken another twist after Menteri Besar Ismail Lasim reportedly verified the earlier media statement released by his state executive council (Exco) on the removal of Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir as the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan—even ordering for the decision to be gazetted.



​According to reports, the April 19 proclamation removing Tuanku Muhriz under Article 10 of the Laws of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959 had been signed and sealed by the lawful Undang, and became complete after Ismail signed it on Aug 3.


​Yet, more recently, on Sept 9, Ismail admitted that he had signed the said proclamation "under duress,” and that his state government considered it invalid for not following Article 10.


​He even lodged a police report and pledged loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz as the "sole legitimate and sovereign" ruler.

(Screenshot of news headline and image from FMT)


​So why the sudden U-turn?


Or could Ismail merely be the fall guy for actors orchestrating this move behind the scenes?


​Royalty strikes back…


​Nevertheless, responding to Ismail’s latest announcement, the state’s Dewan Keadilan dan Undang (DKU) and its secretary have reported that they intend to initiate contempt proceedings against him and members of his Exco over the said proclamation which seemed to breach an existing injunctive order by the court.


In fact, their lawyers have also affirmed that the parties concerned have no jurisdiction, authority or power to make such a proclamation while citing it as unconstitutional, void and without any legal effect.



​They asserted that the conduct is tantamount to a coup d'etat and an act of treason, which is punishable under the Penal Code and other relevant laws.

Screenshot of news headline and image from The Star.


​Meanwhile, commenting on the same crisis, which seems far from over, Senator Sheikh Omar Ali from DAP has raised some fundamental questions.


​Firstly, what wrong did Tuanku Muhriz commit to warrant His Royal Highness's removal from the throne?


​Is it not odd that until this day this question remains unanswered?



Why the silence?


What’s the real agenda behind all the drama?


​Crucially, even the powerful DKU has maintained that Tuanku Muhriz is still the legitimate ruler of the state while dismissing the controversial April 19 proclamation that sought to remove the latter from power.


Secondly, the Exco’s statement claimed that the April 19 abdication proclamation was “finalized” when it was signed by the Menteri Besar on August 3 and that Tuanku Nadzaruddin had been chosen as successor on April 19.


​But the thing is, if the abdication was finalized only on August 3, how was a successor chosen earlier on April 19?



Doesn't it sound like a poorly written script with many holes?


Thirdly, since the Exco claims that the April 19 proclamation became fully valid on August 3, then what was Tuanku Muhriz's legal status between April 19 and August 3?


And what about the legitimacy of official events held during that intervening period, including Ismail’s appointment as Menteri Besar as he had taken his oath in front of Tuanku Muhriz on August 2?


​Likewise, what would be the status of his appointed Exco and the entire new state government?



​As for the outcome of the recent state election—would there be a question mark hanging over that too?


​Sheikh Omar signed off with a note of caution as removing a King is a grave matter requiring valid grounds, legal bases, and proper judicial resolution for any disputes.


​​Furthermore, according to him, the country's Constitution, the dignity of the monarchy, and public trust in the rule of law must always be defended.


​Isn't that what the Rukun Negara always reminds us?


​Interestingly, many will recall how a few months ago the state UMNO had complained that the previous Menteri Besar from PH had failed to handle the royal crisis well.



​And did it not cite that same reason for withdrawing from the PH-led state government, which eventually led to the dissolution of the assembly and a subsequent state election?


​Inevitably, all these may prompt critics to ask: is there a broader political agenda to challenge the authority of Tuanku Muhriz, who is well-known and well-liked for his humble, people-centred approach and staunch anti-corruption stance?


​Still, based on what the ruler's lawyers had highlighted earlier, the bigger and more troubling question may well be this: aren't the actions of those involved in the ongoing attempt to remove the state’s legitimate ruler tantamount to a coup d'etat and an act of treason?