Ex-appeals judge, lawyer question if N Sembilan chieftains accorded ruler due process
Zikri Kamarulzaman
Published: Apr 23, 2026 2:33 PM
Updated: 5:57 PM
A former Court of Appeal judge and a senior lawyer have questioned whether the Negeri Sembilan chieftains had followed due process before they moved to oust Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir as state ruler.
The concerns stem from the wording of Article 10 of the Negeri Sembilan constitution - the law which allows the Undang Yang Empat to remove the ruler.
Specifically, Article 10 states there must be a full and complete inquiry before the undangs can make a decision to dethrone the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.
When declaring their decision to dethrone Tuanku Muhriz, the Undang Yang Empat had launched an investigation against the ruler on March 5 for alleged transgressions in his royal duties.
They deemed the unspecified transgressions to have been committed deliberately, thus besmirching the royal institution.
In an opinion piece published by The Edge, former appeals judge Hishamudin Yunus noted that while he is not privy to the allegations against Tuanku Muhriz or whether the chieftains had followed due process, Tuanku Muhriz had a right to be heard according to the principles of natural justice.
Former appeals judge Hishamudin Yunus
"On the assumption that there had been no due process carried out in the call for abdication, then the proclamation purportedly issued by the three undangs and (Sungai Ujong undang) Mubarak Thahak is not valid," he said.
Hishamudin is a Negeri Sembilan native whose great-great-grandfather, Wan Saeto Rubah, was once undang of Johol.
‘Not given notice’
Constitutional lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar raised similar concerns.
"It does not appear that Tuanku Muhriz was given notice of the alleged defect or defects relied on by the undangs, nor was he afforded any opportunity to be heard.
"This raises a serious question as to how it is that undangs can be said to have conducted the 'full and complete enquiry' that Article 10 imposes as a pre-condition to their exercise of the power to remove the ruler," he said in a letter published on FMT.
Additionally, both Hishamudin and Malik said another reason the undangs' proclamation may be invalid is the fact that Menteri Besar Aminuddin Harun was not a party to the decision.
Article 10(2) states that after the undangs conduct their inquiry and decide to remove a ruler, the Yang di-Pertuan Besar will cease to be in power "provided that as soon as possible thereafter а proclamation to that effect shall be issued under the hands of the undangs and the menteri besar".
Hishamudin opined that without the menteri besar, the proclamation is legally unenforceable.
Hishamudin is a Negeri Sembilan native whose great-great-grandfather, Wan Saeto Rubah, was once undang of Johol.
‘Not given notice’
Constitutional lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar raised similar concerns.
"It does not appear that Tuanku Muhriz was given notice of the alleged defect or defects relied on by the undangs, nor was he afforded any opportunity to be heard.
"This raises a serious question as to how it is that undangs can be said to have conducted the 'full and complete enquiry' that Article 10 imposes as a pre-condition to their exercise of the power to remove the ruler," he said in a letter published on FMT.
Additionally, both Hishamudin and Malik said another reason the undangs' proclamation may be invalid is the fact that Menteri Besar Aminuddin Harun was not a party to the decision.
Article 10(2) states that after the undangs conduct their inquiry and decide to remove a ruler, the Yang di-Pertuan Besar will cease to be in power "provided that as soon as possible thereafter а proclamation to that effect shall be issued under the hands of the undangs and the menteri besar".
Hishamudin opined that without the menteri besar, the proclamation is legally unenforceable.
Negeri Sembilan Menteri Besar Aminuddin Harun
Aminuddin has rejected the proclamation, citing Mubarak's removal from office, while not commenting on the three other undangs support for Tuanku Muhriz's ouster.
Article 29 of the state constitution states that the undangs’ decisions are deemed to have “been duly exercised or performed if such powers were exercised or such duties were performed by at least three undangs or by as many of them as may be living at the time of the exercise of such powers or the performance of such duties.”
While acknowledging Article 29, Hishamudin said that Mubarak's participation in the proclamation makes its validity questionable.
Aminuddin has rejected the proclamation, citing Mubarak's removal from office, while not commenting on the three other undangs support for Tuanku Muhriz's ouster.
Article 29 of the state constitution states that the undangs’ decisions are deemed to have “been duly exercised or performed if such powers were exercised or such duties were performed by at least three undangs or by as many of them as may be living at the time of the exercise of such powers or the performance of such duties.”
While acknowledging Article 29, Hishamudin said that Mubarak's participation in the proclamation makes its validity questionable.
Mubarak’s removal ‘invalid’
A faction of nobles and clansfolk in Sungai Ujong had moved to remove Mubarak as undang last May over unspecified transgressions, including acts which allegedly breached Islamic law and customs.
The move was then reported to have been accepted by the Negeri Sembilan Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Ruling Chiefs (Dewan Keadilan dan Undang) during a meeting on April 17.
Former menteri besar Rais Yatim, however, claimed that during the council meeting, the undangs of Johol, Jelebu, and Rembau, as well as the Tunku Besar Tampin, had disagreed with Mubarak's removal.
Former menteri besar Rais Yatim
Rais argued that this made Mubarak's removal invalid. It is unclear if Mubarak was given a chance to explain himself.
However, his supporters had claimed that authorities had investigated the Sungai Ujong clansfolk's allegations against him and found no wrongdoing.
Further, Mubarak's camp alleged that two nobles who moved to oust him had also been removed from office over alleged corruption.
Malik said it must be established whether there was any basis for whether or not Mubarak was removed by the council on April 17.
"If this is the case, then the matter ends there.
"Although the menteri besar has confirmed the removal, further confirmation from the Negeri Sembilan Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Ruling Chiefs may have a calming effect," he added.
Rais argued that this made Mubarak's removal invalid. It is unclear if Mubarak was given a chance to explain himself.
However, his supporters had claimed that authorities had investigated the Sungai Ujong clansfolk's allegations against him and found no wrongdoing.
Further, Mubarak's camp alleged that two nobles who moved to oust him had also been removed from office over alleged corruption.
Malik said it must be established whether there was any basis for whether or not Mubarak was removed by the council on April 17.
"If this is the case, then the matter ends there.
"Although the menteri besar has confirmed the removal, further confirmation from the Negeri Sembilan Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Ruling Chiefs may have a calming effect," he added.
No comments:
Post a Comment