The Mentri Besar of Negri Sembilan, Datuk Ismail Lasim, has stated that he does not possess the unilateral authority to remove or vacate the position of the state’s Yang di-Pertuan Besar, emphasizing that such matters are governed by the Laws of the Constitution of Negri Sembilan 1959. Speaking after a state executive council meeting on Tuesday, Ismail underscored that any action concerning the state ruler must adhere strictly to constitutional provisions rather than political or personal considerations.

Ismail highlighted that the state executive council focused on determining the legality and source of power behind a proclamation issued on August 3, in which he signed an instrument purportedly removing Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir as the Yang di-Pertuan Besar. He later claimed that he signed the document under duress and filed a report regarding the matter. The Mentri Besar and the state government now regard the proclamation as void, unconstitutional, and unenforceable, contending that it failed to meet the procedural and substantive criteria set out in Article 10 of the state’s constitution.

According to Ismail, the constitutional framework for actions against the Yang di-Pertuan Besar involves specific requirements and processes designed to protect the integrity of the constitutional monarchy. He said the involvement of the Mentri Besar in such processes does not translate into the power to unilaterally decide the ruler’s status. Instead, power must emanate from the Constitution itself and relevant state laws, with clearly defined roles for the royal institution, the ruling chiefs (Undang), the Mentri Besar, and the state government.

Ismail reaffirmed his respect and loyalty to Tuanku Muhriz, the four ruling chiefs, and the constitutional framework governing Negri Sembilan. He emphasized that the key issue at hand is the validity and legal effect of the controversial proclamation rather than personal interests. “What needs to be defended is not the interest of any individual, but the supremacy of the Constitution, legal aspects and the continuity of the institution of the constitutional monarchy,” he said.

In contrast, lawyers representing the Undang of Johol, the three other former Undang, the Tunku Besar of Tampin, and the former Dato’ Shahbandar of Sungei Ujong have disputed Ismail’s claims. They asserted that the Mentri Besar signed the removal document voluntarily and with full knowledge of the reasons behind Tuanku Muhriz’s removal. The dispute highlights differing interpretations of constitutional powers and procedures related to the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, underscoring the complexities of the state’s governance and royal succession processes.