Legal experts are weighing in on the ongoing dispute in Negri Sembilan concerning the Yang di-Pertuan Besar’s authority to revoke appointments of executive council (exco) members, with consensus that the issue should be addressed through constitutional provisions, adat customs, and dialogue.

Associate Professor Dr. Muhammad Fathi Yusof of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia emphasized that the phrase “at the pleasure of the Ruler” in Article XXXVIII(5) of the Negri Sembilan Constitution should not be interpreted as granting unrestricted discretion to the Yang di-Pertuan Besar. He noted the same article explicitly anticipates that the Ruler’s revocation of an exco member’s appointment occurs on the advice of the Mentri Besar. According to Muhammad Fathi, the Constitution requires the Ruler to act based on the executive council’s advice or an authorized member, barring any specific constitutional exceptions. He suggested that although the Ruler does have the power to revoke appointments, its exercise must adhere to the established constitutional process. He also urged prioritizing the continuity of state administration while seeking a resolution grounded in state constitutional law, adat traditions, and constructive dialogue.

Datin Dr. Faridah Jalil, a former law professor from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, highlighted that the dispute extends beyond questions of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar’s discretion over the Mentri Besar and the exco. She pointed to the institutional framework established by the Negri Sembilan Constitution, which involves the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, ruling chiefs, Mentri Besar, executive council, and adat institutions. Faridah characterized the monarchical authority in Negri Sembilan as institutional rather than personal, emphasizing that the Ruler functions within an intertwined system of royal authority, democratic governance, and customary laws. She added that adat resam and constitutional conventions play vital roles in interpreting and exercising constitutional powers, especially when the Constitution is silent or unclear. Faridah concluded that the core constitutional question is whether the Ruler is authorized to exercise such powers independently and personally under the Constitution.

Former Malaysian Bar president Salim Bashir expressed that the Yang di-Pertuan Besar holds constitutional authority to revoke exco appointments. Citing the same constitutional article, Salim noted that exco members (excluding the Mentri Besar) serve at the Ruler’s pleasure and can be removed either upon the Mentri Besar’s advice or due to breaches of their oath of office. Salim argued that since some exco members had withdrawn their allegiance to Tuanku Muhriz, they had breached their oaths, making their removal necessary. He called for prompt reappointments to ensure state government operations continue smoothly and public welfare is protected.

Dr. Azmi Hassan, senior fellow at the Nusantara Academy for Strategic Research, agreed that the phrase “at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar” grants the Ruler discretion to revoke exco appointments. He underlined the need to resolve the dispute through legal channels based on the state Constitution to avoid a constitutional deadlock or crisis, particularly regarding the legitimacy of the terminated exco members. Azmi recommended that disputes be settled by the courts and that all parties respect judicial outcomes to restore political stability in Negri Sembilan.