Can the Yamtuan remove excos without MB’s advice? Sacked Negeri Sembilan councillors turn to apex court

Can the Yamtuan remove excos without MB’s advice? Sacked Negeri Sembilan councillors turn to apex court



Negeri Sembilan Menteri Besar Datuk Ismail Lasim (right) attends a press conference with state exco members in Seremban on September 24, 2026. — Bernama pic


Summary

• A constitutional dispute has been initiated at the Federal Court by ten former executive council members from Negeri Sembilan, challenging the Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz's decision to revoke their appointments without the menteri besar's advice.
• The group seeks a ruling on the constitutionality of their dismissal, arguing that it may contravene the state constitution if it allows the ruler discretionary power to dismiss councillors without adhering to governmental advice.
• This legal action follows their dismissal due to allegations of disloyalty after they supported a rival claimant to the throne.

First Published: Wednesday, 21 Oct 2026 12:51 PM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 21 — Ten dismissed Negeri Sembilan executive council members have mounted an unprecedented constitutional dispute at the Federal Court, asking it to determine if the Yang di-Pertuan Besar has the prerogative to revoke their appointments without the advice of the menteri besar.

The lawsuit challenges the decision by Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir to revoke their appointments, an order that took effect on Sept 20 and was formally gazetted on Sept 24.


The applicants comprise former councillors Faizal Ramli, Zaifulbahri Idris, Mustapha Nagoor, Siow Kong Choon, Siti Nur Umairah Hashim, Asna Amin, Razi Ali, Suhaimizan Bizar, Fairuz Isa, and Razali Abu Samah, FMT reported.

Through a notice of motion lodged on Oct 14, the group petitioned the apex court to rule on the constitutionality of their dismissal and declare the revocation null, void, and of no legal effect should it run counter to the state constitution.


The application names the Negeri Sembilan state secretary and the state government as the first and second respondents respectively.

Central to the dispute is the scope of royal discretionary powers. The applicants are seeking judicial determination on whether the phrase “at the ruler’s pleasure” in the state charter confers unbridled authority on the sovereign to dismiss executive councillors at will, irrespective of constitutional provisions requiring royal assent to align with the advice of the head of government.

Tuanku Muhriz previously stripped all ten executive council members of their posts for conduct the palace deemed treasonous to their oaths of office.


The palace acted after the councillors publicly endorsed a controversial declaration asserting that Tuanku Muhriz was legitimately dethroned in April and proclaiming Tunku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar as the state's rightful ruler.


The royal household held that backing a rival claimant to the throne was wholly incompatible with their sworn constitutional duty of allegiance to the reigning sovereign.