Did NS govt interfere with monarchy in proclamation stance, asks analyst

NEGERI SEMBILAN, 26 SEPTEMBER 2026 —

Negeri Sembilan’s Menteri Besar Ismail Lasim is under pressure to explain the constitutional authority behind his executive council’s decision to affirm a proclamation seeking to remove Yang Dipertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir, a move analysts say risks being seen as political interference in the monarchy.

The episode marks the latest turn in a constitutional dispute that has already toppled one state government and now tests the consistency of the coalition that replaced it. In April, Umno’s 14 state assemblymen, led by Jalaluddin Alias, withdrew support from then Menteri Besar Aminuddin Harun of Pakatan Harapan after his administration refused to endorse the proclamation, which was purportedly issued by the state’s four Undangs.

Barisan Nasional said at the time it was acting in defence of the state constitution, laws and adat institutions. The withdrawal collapsed the PH-BN coalition government and forced a state election that returned BN to power. Now, with Ismail at the helm, the new administration has taken the opposite position, endorsing the very document the AGC had invalidated and the DKU had rejected.

Syaza Shukri of the International Islamic University Malaysia said the government’s shift from acknowledging a dispute to deciding the ruler’s legitimacy crosses a constitutional line. “Here, the government was not merely taking note, but making a decision on the position of the Yang Dipertuan Besar,” she told Free Malaysia Today. She said the sacked executive council should have maintained the status quo after the AGC’s conclusion, rather than moving to replace the sitting ruler.

Syaza added that Ismail must now set out the specific constitutional grounds empowering the exco to support or recognise a replacement for the Yang di-Pertuan Besar. The explanation is necessary, she said, because BN had previously accused Aminuddin of interfering in royal affairs by pledging continued support for Tuanku Muhriz. “If there is a substantive position that distinguishes the situation then from now, that difference must be explained,” she said.

The principle of collective responsibility, Syaza said, extends to all members of the state government, not only Umno. PAS, now part of the administration, had previously backed Jalaluddin’s actions in April. “If PAS or its exco members had objections, show the record. Silence means agreement,” she said.

The analyst’s argument underscores that the current executive council’s decision to affirm the proclamation binds the entire coalition, including parties that may have differing views on the monarchy’s constitutional position.

Ahmad Zaharuddin Sani Ahmad Sabri of Global Asia Consulting said political parties are being judged on the consistency of their principles, not only on individual decisions. “The people do not only judge decisions, they judge consistency,” he said, describing the crisis as a test of that consistency.

He noted that Aminuddin’s administration had previously raised questions about interference in adat institutions, and the new government must now explain where it draws the line when making decisions that directly affect the Yang di-Pertuan Besar’s position. Zaharuddin acknowledged that BN may hold its own legal interpretation and that proponents of the proclamation might argue it rests on customary law powers.

However, he said the positions of the AGC and the DKU — which on September 13 reaffirmed Tuanku Muhriz as the lawful ruler — could not simply be brushed aside. He called for an end to politicking in Negeri Sembilan and for all parties to respect the state constitution, adat institutions and legal process. “Politics may change after an election but principles should remain unchanged after gaining power,” he said.

The sequence of Ismail’s own statements has added to the scrutiny. On September 9, six days before he was sworn in, Ismail told a press conference that the proclamation was invalid for non-compliance with Article 10 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959. He said he had signed the document under duress and had lodged a police report to facilitate investigations.

Yet on September 15, shortly after taking office, Ismail and his exco affirmed the same proclamation and moved to have it gazetted and enforced, directly contradicting the AGC’s position. The reversal has become a focal point for critics who say the government’s legal rationale appears to shift with its political interests.

The analysts said the state government must now answer three core questions. First, the constitutional basis of its authority to recognise or endorse a replacement for the Yang Dipertuan Besar. Second, the reasons for taking a position that contradicts the advice of the AGC and the declarations of the DKU.

Third, how its decision to ignore the DKU’s position differs from its own criticism of Aminuddin’s refusal to endorse the April 19 proclamation when he was Menteri Besar. The answers will determine whether the administration can credibly claim to be upholding the constitution and adat, or whether it will be seen as using royal institutions for partisan ends.

The crisis has also drawn attention to the role of the Undangs, the four territorial chiefs who under Negeri Sembilan’s unique elective monarchy select the Yang di-Pertuan Besar. The April 19 proclamation was presented as their act, but its validity has been rejected by the federal AGC and the state’s own DKU.

The DKU’s September 13 declaration that Tuanku Muhriz remains the lawful ruler carries weight as the body tasked with adjudicating disputes over the monarchy. By moving to gazette the proclamation despite that declaration, the state executive council has placed itself in direct opposition to the institution designed to interpret adat in such matters.

Observers say the episode risks undermining public confidence in the separation between political power and the monarchy, a principle embedded in both the federal and state constitutions. The Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959 sets out the process for the election and removal of the ruler, and Article 10, cited by Ismail in his September 9 statement, governs the Undangs’ proceedings.

The AGC’s invalidation of the proclamation suggests a procedural defect that the state government has not publicly addressed. Instead, the executive council’s affirmation of the document implies a political judgment overriding the legal opinion of the federation’s chief legal adviser.

The analysts’ call for consistency extends beyond the immediate protagonists. Zaharuddin’s remark that principles should remain unchanged after gaining power speaks to a broader pattern in Malaysian state politics, where coalition realignments have frequently shifted parties’ positions on constitutional questions. The Negeri Sembilan case is distinctive because it involves the elective monarchy, a system that depends on the Undangs’ independence and the DKU’s authority.

When the executive branch intervenes to declare a ruler removed, it tests the very architecture of that system.

The state government’s next steps will be closely watched. The police report lodged by Ismail on September 9, citing duress in signing the proclamation, remains an open investigation. The DKU’s reaffirmation of Tuanku Muhriz stands as the latest formal determination by the adat body. The AGC’s opinion, issued before the election, has not been withdrawn.

With the executive council now seeking to gazette the proclamation, the legal and constitutional contest is poised to move from political statements into the courts or the Conference of Rulers, where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and fellow rulers may be called upon to resolve the impasse.

Related: Ismail Lasim · Negeri Sembilan