N Sembilan chieftains list alleged breaches behind Tuanku Muhriz's removal

Four disputed territorial chieftains of Negeri Sembilan and the tunku besar of Tampin today released a list of alleged offences committed by state ruler Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir, which they said formed the basis of their April 19 proclamation removing him as the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.

In a 12-page statement, the chieftains laid out a series of events in which they alleged Tuanku Muhriz had breached the Negeri Sembilan constitution, which provides for a separation of powers between the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Undang Yang Empat as co-rulers of the state.

Among other allegations, Tuanku Muhriz was accused of interfering in the internal affairs of Rembau luak by ordering state officials to entertain complaints from a rival faction opposed to Abdul Rahim Yasin’s appointment as its chieftain on July 4, 2025.

The Undang Yang Empat said this amounted to a breach of Articles 3 and 4 of an agreement signed in 1898, which they claimed remains recognised and in force under the current state constitution.

"The evidence (of this action) is in writing and undisputed: the final decision (on Rahim’s appointment) was reopened following a complaint from the people of the (Rembau) territory - precisely the act prohibited by Articles 3 and 4 of the 1898 Agreement - despite full knowledge of its finality," the statement said.

The chieftains were referring to a sitting of the Negeri Sembilan Council of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Ruling Chiefs (Dewan Keadilan dan Undang, or DKU), chaired by Tuanku Muhriz (above) on March 5, during which complaints against Rahim were discussed.

Article 3 of the agreement states that the Yang di-Pertuan Besar shall not interfere in the state’s religious and customary affairs, and that the affairs of each luak (territory) are not subject to his directives.

Article 4, meanwhile, states that the ruler shall not entertain complaints or appeals from officers or people of a luak against their undang.

Due process

The Undang Yang Empat also alleged that Tuanku Muhriz had failed to consult them before attending a Conference of Rulers meeting and had delayed the appointment of the state mufti in an attempt to push through a candidate without their consultation.

The chieftains also rejected claims that Tuanku Muhriz’s removal had been carried out without due process, including the proper investigation required under the state constitution.

Citing Article 10 of the constitution, they pointed to its use of the term "enquiry", rather than "inquiry", and said the requirement had been fulfilled during a closed-door session with Tuanku Muhriz on March 5.

READ MORE: KINIGUIDE | Negeri Sembilan royal rumble: What's going on?

"The enquiry under Article 10 is therefore an internal and closed inquiry conducted by the undang themselves, by directly questioning the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and giving His Highness an opportunity to respond to preserve His Highness’s dignity and avoid bringing shame upon him.

"It does not require an external tribunal, a public hearing or trial-like procedures. 'Full and complete' refers to the scope of consideration, not the formalities.

"This enquiry was conducted on March 5, 2026. It was expressly stated that the enquiry under Article 10 was ongoing, and Mubarak Thahak, as the undang of Sungai Ujong luak, put three questions directly to His Highness," the chieftains said.

‘Recognise removal’

They further alleged that Tuanku Muhriz committed another transgression by attempting to remove Mubarak after the enquiry.

They said this occurred when the ruler called for a DKU sitting on April 17, during which he heard complaints from a group of disputed Sungai Ujong nobles against Mubarak.

The hearing was conducted without Mubarak and Rahim being present, they said.

According to the Undang Yang Empat, Tuanku Muhriz then instructed then-menteri besar Aminuddin Harun (below) to issue a statement saying that the DKU had advised Mubarak to accept his removal, despite no such decision having been reached during the sitting.

"Based on these facts, the Undang Yang Empat maintain that Tuanku Muhriz was found to have interfered in the affairs of Rembau and Sungai Ujong, and acted to remove the rulers of both luak - namely the ruling chiefs who, under Article 28, together with the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, constitute the composite ruler of Negeri Sembilan," they said.

The chieftains, who maintain that Tuanku Muhriz is now acting as Yang di-Pertuan Besar unconstitutionally, urged all parties - including the federal government, the Negeri Sembilan state secretary and state civil servants - to recognise his removal.

N Sembilan royal imbroglio stalls BN-PN bid to reclaim Harapan allocations?

N Sembilan crisis: Cops to question axed excos today; MB to work around royal standoff?

'Suo motu': How Federal Court can act on its own to resolve N Sembilan crisis

COMMENT | N Sembilan crisis: When a disputed proclamation becomes an order to govern