Ex-N Sembilan excos seek court declaration on whether their removal was valid
Ten former Negeri Sembilan state executive councillors have filed an originating summons at the Seremban High Court to challenge the validity of the gazette revoking their appointments.
In a press statement today, law firm Messrs Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak stated that the originating summons seeks a court declaration on whether the gazette issued by State Secretary Zafir Ibrahim is valid and enforceable.
This comes as...
Ten former Negeri Sembilan state executive councillors have filed an originating summons at the Seremban High Court to challenge the validity of the gazette revoking their appointments.
In a press statement today, law firm Messrs Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak stated that the originating summons seeks a court declaration on whether the gazette issued by State Secretary Zafir Ibrahim is valid and enforceable.
This comes as the applicants contend that the revocation of their appointments by Yang di-Pertuan Besar Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir was made without the advice of Menteri Besar Ismail Lasim.
“The advice of the menteri besar is required under Article XXXVIII(5), read together with Article XL(1), XL(1A), and XL(2) of the Laws of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959,” the statement read.
The summons, filed on Oct 5, names the Negeri Sembilan state secretary and the state government as the first and second defendants, respectively.
/file/attachments/orphans/IsmailLasim2_490242.png)
The originating summons is supported by 10 affidavits from each of the former excos, alongside an additional affidavit from Ismail (above).
The law firm also urged the public not to speculate on the summons until the court decides on it to avoid sub judice.
Flip-flop
Earlier on Aug 3, a day after taking his oath as menteri besar, Ismail met with a disputed faction of the Undang Yang Empat (territorial chieftains) and rival claimant to the throne, Tunku Nadzaruddin Tuanku Ja’afar.
During the meeting, he signed a document endorsing an April 19 proclamation by the chieftains purporting to depose Tuanku Muhriz.
When the matter came to light on Sept 6, Ismail distanced himself from the document and pledged his loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz.
/file/attachments/orphans/TuankuMuhriz_885315.png)
He then lodged a police report on Sept 8 and, the following day, issued a statement claiming he was forced to sign the document, once again reaffirming his loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz.
However, on Sept 15, an exco meeting chaired by Ismail decided to recognise Tunku Nadzaruddin as Yang di-Pertuan Besar, after which Ismail maintained that shifted stance.
Excos sacked
Tuanku Muhriz then revoked the appointments of the 10 exco members on Sept 21 with immediate effect for allegedly breaching their oath of office.
The ruler cited Article XXXVIII(5) of the state constitution, which stipulates that an exco member holds office during the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.
Tuanku Muhriz then requested Ismail, who remained as menteri besar, to submit a new list of exco candidates for royal consent.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/07/dde84bb815a61ebdc96c47064f16b1ab.jpg)
The menteri besar, however, rejected the revocation, calling it unconstitutional and arguing that the ruler does not have the power to unilaterally dismiss excos.
He also appealed to state authorities to reconsider the directive barring the former exco members from entering their offices and discharging their duties.
The revocation was subsequently gazetted on Sept 24. The gazette stated that the revocation took effect on Sept 20 due to a breach of the pledge of allegiance to the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.
The 10 former exco members are from Umno, MCA, PAS, and Parti Wawasan.
Where is your loyalty now? Insist of being loyal and yet act disloyal. BN 2 headed snake ?
This is a good course of action. The court judgement will clarify the law, which is what is needed to ascertain if decisions were made according to the law.
The 10 sacked excos just want a judgement that their revocation was valid. Of course it was valid. The Yamtuan has the authority and jurisdiction under the state constitution to revoke their appointments. Goodness, these 10, not enough shameful that they repudiated their ruler after swearing their loyalty, obediance and fealty to the Yamtuan. Stuff it guys, if you want your dirty laundry to come out, so be it. PDRM will of course investigate sedition and derhaka charges against you lot, police reports have already been lodged. The law is the law, not lawless like what you did.
Report this comment
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2024/10/863edc34e9eff4655dad897bb827f147.jpg)

/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/04/2fad8db89eebcb4956856fc91429ec39.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/06/3b7ead7651953033baa52e58bd9c8ee2.jpg)
/file/attachments/886/99566fa213522b5ec8390d9d7bc010b4_713216.jpg)
/file/attachments/orphans/undang423_276515.png)
/file/attachments/orphans/asdaasadasdas_388232.png)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/08/b1474f024fb67114022904f03b1f7cff.jpg)
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.