Undang's push to oust Tuanku Muhriz plunges Negeri Sembilan into crisis, but allegations against ruler remain unclear

Despite the gravity of the “removal proclamation” issued by four Undang, the absence of specific allegations against Negeri Sembilan's Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir continues to fuel uncertainty and speculation.

KUALA LUMPUR: Negeri Sembilan’s constitutional crisis has entered a critical phase, with four ruling chieftains — the Undang Yang Empat — pressing for the removal of Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir.

Yet, despite the gravity of the “removal proclamation” issued earlier this week, a key question remains unanswered: what exactly are the allegations against the ruler?

The Laws of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959 allows abdication or temporary withdrawal by His Highness at the request of the Undang. Article 10(1) outlines the conditions under which the ruler may be asked to withdraw or abdicate, including serious defects or actions deemed detrimental to the dignity of the office or contrary to constitutional provisions.

Article 10(2) states that upon such a decision, the ruler ceases to exercise his functions, with a regent or council assuming authority.

To date, the Undang have not disclosed any specific wrongdoing, allowing speculation to intensify.

However, the Constitution states that a proclamation must then be issued jointly by the Undang and the Menteri Besar.

Tuanku Muhriz is expected to open the state legislative assembly tomorrow at 10am, where he will deliver his royal address at the first meeting of the assembly’s fourth session. He could address the due process and constitutional adherence.

The crisis has been further complicated by a direct confrontation between the four Undang and Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Aminuddin Harun.

Aminuddin, the PKR assemblyman for Port Dickson, has rejected the declaration by the Undang, calling it null and void. Critics, however, argue that he may have overstepped by intervening in a royal matter.

Political parties are watching closely in a state where Umno holds 14 seats in the assembly.

The state government’s position centres on the legitimacy of one of the signatories — Datuk Mubarak Dohak, the Undang of Sungai Ujong. It maintains that Mubarak was stripped of his title in 2025 following 33 alleged breaches of custom, rendering his participation in the proclamation invalid.

In response, the four Undang issued a joint statement dismissing the Menteri Besar’s claims as fabrication. They said the Council of Justice and Law had not reached a decision to remove the Undang of Sungai Ujong and questioned Aminuddin’s fitness to lead the state.

The standoff has effectively split the state’s leadership, creating a legal vacuum that could disrupt the upcoming assembly sitting.

The Undang have also named Tunku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar, the youngest son of a former Yang di-Pertuan Besar, as their preferred successor. Neither Nadzaruddin nor Seri Menanti has issued a statement.

A system unlike any other

Negeri Sembilan’s monarchy is unique in Malaysia. Unlike hereditary systems elsewhere, the Yang di-Pertuan Besar is elected by four ruling chiefs — the Undang Yang Empat — representing Sungai Ujong, Jelebu, Johol and Rembau, as provided under Article 7(2) of the Constitution.

Their authority is rooted in Adat Perpatih, a matrilineal customary system that predates modern law but is embedded within the constitution.

It should be noted that Article 29 of the Constitution allows decisions to be made by at least three Undang, effectively lowering the threshold for action.

The spark: A disputed removal

The crisis traces back to May 2025, when Mubarak was removed as Undang of Sungai Ujong following 33 alleged breaches of custom and religious conduct.

The state government maintains the removal was lawful and recognised by the Dewan Keadilan dan Undang (DKU), an advisory body on customary matters. However, this has been contested.

Several senior DKU members later said no unanimous decision had been reached during a special sitting on April 17, raising doubts about the legitimacy of Mubarak’s removal. They also argued that the council does not have unilateral authority without the consent of the Undangs.

This dispute over Mubarak’s status has become central to the current crisis.

Law, custom and competing interpretations

The crisis has evolved into a complex constitutional question.

A senior lawyer familiar with Negeri Sembilan’s framework interpreted the constitutional provisions to mean that the authority to remove the Yang di-Pertuan Besar lies solely with the Undang Yang Empat.

The lawyer told Twentytwo13, on condition of anonymity,  that if at least three Undang agree, the removal could be legally effective regardless of whether the Menteri Besar endorses it. This interpretation challenges the state government’s position and raises questions about executive overreach.

Recent developments suggest the chieftains have signalled dissatisfaction, with some observers speculating about a potential vote of no confidence against the Menteri Besar.

Pushback from all sides

The fallout has been swift.

Customary leaders in Rembau have rejected the move to depose Tuanku Muhriz, calling it unlawful and contrary to Adat Perpatih. Police reports have been lodged, alongside warnings against actions that could incite public disorder.

Conflicting claims have also emerged, including suggestions that another Undang — from Jelebu — may have been removed earlier, complicating quorum calculations.

What happens next?

For now, the crisis remains unresolved, suspended between competing claims of legitimacy.

Attention has turned to tomorrow’s opening of the state assembly.

The dispute may ultimately test the limits of Malaysia’s legal system. While some provisions deem such matters final and non-justiciable, the overlap between custom, monarchy and executive authority could invite scrutiny.

At its core, the crisis exposes a deeper tension within Negeri Sembilan’s governance model.

Adat Perpatih, constitutional monarchy and electoral politics do not merely coexist — they intersect, and at times, collide.

The Undang embody collective authority rooted in tradition. The Yang di-Pertuan Besar represents continuity and legitimacy. The Menteri Besar operates within democratic governance.

In normal times, these layers function in balance. In crisis, the question becomes unavoidable: whose authority prevails?

For now, there are no clear answers — only a high-stakes constitutional drama unfolding in one of Malaysia’s most distinctive states.

Image: Information Department Malaysia