/file/attachments/orphans/asdasdasasdasd_912005.png)
Don't hide behind excuses, explain why you signed proclamation, ex-N Sembilan MB tells Ismail
Published: Sep 25, 2026 1:35 PM
Former Negeri Sembilan menteri besar Aminuddin Harun has told his successor, Ismail Lasim, not to blame the previous administration for the ongoing state royal imbroglio and urged him to explain why he signed the controversial proclamation to install a new ruler.
Aminuddin (above, right) said he had no problem with his record as menteri besar being scrutinised, but Ismail should specify what alleged wrongdoing the previous state government committed.
“Don’t just use the term ‘previous government’ as a general answer. If there was wrongdoing, state what it was. If there was a breach of the law, state the provision.
“In a matter this serious, the people have a right to clear and verifiable facts,” he said in a statement today.
Yesterday, Ismail (above, left) brushed aside questions about his shifting loyalties to the state ruler and his claim that he was forced to sign a document affirming the state’s disputed territorial chieftains' (Undang Yang Empat) move to dethrone Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir (below).
/file/attachments/orphans/TuankuMuhriz_885315.png)
On Aug 3, a day after being sworn in as menteri besar, Ismail met with the chieftains and rival claimant to the throne, Tunku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar.
During that meeting, he signed a document affirming the territorial chieftain's proclamation on April 19 dethroning Tuanku Muhriz.
When the matter was made public on Sept 6, Ismail distanced himself from the document and pledged loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz.
READ MORE: MB 'forced' to sign order against Tuanku Muhriz, but doesn’t say why he met rebel undangs
'I refused to sign same document'
Commenting further, Aminuddin said that on April 20, while he was still menteri besar, he was presented with a proclamation dated April 19 for his signature, with reference to the process under Article 10 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution.
He said he decided not to sign it as he had serious concerns about the process, including whether the requirements under Article 10 had been fully complied with.
Aminuddin added that his position was based on legal advice that a menteri besar should not sign a document with such significant implications for the institution of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar when questions over the process and its validity are unresolved.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/07/dde84bb815a61ebdc96c47064f16b1ab.jpg)
“If I, during my tenure as menteri besar, could decide not to sign the document due to doubts regarding the process, how is it that the signature of the menteri besar who succeeded me appears on that same document?” he asked.
He noted that Ismail had acknowledged the signature as his own but later claimed that he had signed the document under duress. The menteri besar later lodged a police report on the matter.
Aminuddin also pointed to the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ Sept 17 statement, which said that the April 19 proclamation was invalid because the mandatory requirements under Article 10 had not been complied with.
READ MORE: AGC: N Sembilan MB, state exco's decision on Tuanku Muhriz invalid
At the same time, he acknowledged that the Undang Yang Empat secretariat had disputed this position, maintaining that the inquiries conducted on March 5 and April 19 had fulfilled the requirements of Article 10 of the state constitution.
“The difference in interpretation itself shows that compliance with Article 10 is a substantive issue and not something that can be simplified by blaming only one party,” he said.
‘What changed in early September?’
Separately, former minister Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz also questioned the sequence of events surrounding Ismail’s signing of the proclamation and his subsequent position on the matter.
In a statement yesterday, Zafrul said that Ismail took his oath as menteri besar before Tuanku Muhriz on Aug 2 and signed the proclamation concerning the ruler’s removal the following day.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/09/19d0a1d35423700374425f91c41a4e7a.jpg)
Yet on Sept 6, more than a month after signing the document, Ismail still publicly expressed full support and loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz as Yang di-Pertuan Besar, Zafrul added.
Three days later, Ismail lodged a police report saying he unwillingly signed the proclamation to remove Tuanku Muhriz and under duress, while the state government maintained that the proclamation did not comply with the prescribed process and procedures.
On Sept 15, Ismail maintained that a proclamation did not, by itself, create the constitutional power required to remove the ruler and that questions over its source of authority, conditions, and procedures needed to be determined.
However, the state executive council, chaired by Ismail, unanimously decided on the same day that the proclamation was valid and in force.
The decision to remove Tuanku Muhriz as Yang di-Pertuan Besar was announced on Sept 16, while Ismail again confirmed the exco decision the next day and directed that the gazettement process proceed.
READ MORE: KINIGUIDE | Negeri Sembilan royal rumble: What's going on?
Therefore, Zafrul called upon Ismail to explain what had changed between Sept 9 and 15.
Among the questions he raised were whether Ismail was indeed forced to sign the proclamation on Aug 3, who allegedly forced him, what prompted the change in position between Sept 9 and Sept 15, and whether he had also been pressured into changing his position.
“If there was pressure to change your position, who was involved and who did you meet during that period?” Zafrul asked.
Former Negeri Sembilan menteri besar Aminuddin Harun has told his successor, Ismail Lasim, not to blame the previous administration for the ongoing state royal imbroglio and urged him to explain why he signed the controversial proclamation to install a new ruler.
Aminuddin (above, right) said he had no problem with his record as menteri besar being scrutinised, but Ismail should specify what alleged wrongdoing the previous state government committed.
“Don’t just use the term ‘previous government’ as a general answer. If there was wrongdoing, state what it was. If there was a breach of the law, state the provision.
“In a matter this serious, the people have a right to clear and verifiable facts,” he said in a statement today.
Yesterday, Ismail (above, left) brushed aside questions about his shifting loyalties to the state ruler and his claim that he was forced to sign a document affirming the state’s disputed territorial chieftains' (Undang Yang Empat) move to dethrone Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir (below).
On Aug 3, a day after being sworn in as menteri besar, Ismail met with the chieftains and rival claimant to the throne, Tunku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar.
During that meeting, he signed a document affirming the territorial chieftain's proclamation on April 19 dethroning Tuanku Muhriz.
When the matter was made public on Sept 6, Ismail distanced himself from the document and pledged loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz.
READ MORE: MB 'forced' to sign order against Tuanku Muhriz, but doesn’t say why he met rebel undangs
'I refused to sign same document'
Commenting further, Aminuddin said that on April 20, while he was still menteri besar, he was presented with a proclamation dated April 19 for his signature, with reference to the process under Article 10 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution.
He said he decided not to sign it as he had serious concerns about the process, including whether the requirements under Article 10 had been fully complied with.
Aminuddin added that his position was based on legal advice that a menteri besar should not sign a document with such significant implications for the institution of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar when questions over the process and its validity are unresolved.
“If I, during my tenure as menteri besar, could decide not to sign the document due to doubts regarding the process, how is it that the signature of the menteri besar who succeeded me appears on that same document?” he asked.
He noted that Ismail had acknowledged the signature as his own but later claimed that he had signed the document under duress. The menteri besar later lodged a police report on the matter.
Aminuddin also pointed to the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ Sept 17 statement, which said that the April 19 proclamation was invalid because the mandatory requirements under Article 10 had not been complied with.
READ MORE: AGC: N Sembilan MB, state exco's decision on Tuanku Muhriz invalid
At the same time, he acknowledged that the Undang Yang Empat secretariat had disputed this position, maintaining that the inquiries conducted on March 5 and April 19 had fulfilled the requirements of Article 10 of the state constitution.
“The difference in interpretation itself shows that compliance with Article 10 is a substantive issue and not something that can be simplified by blaming only one party,” he said.
‘What changed in early September?’
Separately, former minister Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz also questioned the sequence of events surrounding Ismail’s signing of the proclamation and his subsequent position on the matter.
In a statement yesterday, Zafrul said that Ismail took his oath as menteri besar before Tuanku Muhriz on Aug 2 and signed the proclamation concerning the ruler’s removal the following day.
Yet on Sept 6, more than a month after signing the document, Ismail still publicly expressed full support and loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz as Yang di-Pertuan Besar, Zafrul added.
Three days later, Ismail lodged a police report saying he unwillingly signed the proclamation to remove Tuanku Muhriz and under duress, while the state government maintained that the proclamation did not comply with the prescribed process and procedures.
On Sept 15, Ismail maintained that a proclamation did not, by itself, create the constitutional power required to remove the ruler and that questions over its source of authority, conditions, and procedures needed to be determined.
However, the state executive council, chaired by Ismail, unanimously decided on the same day that the proclamation was valid and in force.
The decision to remove Tuanku Muhriz as Yang di-Pertuan Besar was announced on Sept 16, while Ismail again confirmed the exco decision the next day and directed that the gazettement process proceed.
READ MORE: KINIGUIDE | Negeri Sembilan royal rumble: What's going on?
Therefore, Zafrul called upon Ismail to explain what had changed between Sept 9 and 15.
Among the questions he raised were whether Ismail was indeed forced to sign the proclamation on Aug 3, who allegedly forced him, what prompted the change in position between Sept 9 and Sept 15, and whether he had also been pressured into changing his position.
“If there was pressure to change your position, who was involved and who did you meet during that period?” Zafrul asked.
No comments:
Post a Comment