AGC: Exco statement has no legal effect, move to gazette or implement Yamtuan removal proclamation invalid, unconstitutional

The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) stated that the Negeri Sembilan state executive council's proclamation lacks legal authority under the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959.

There is no legal basis for the proclamation, and the AGC noted the lack of compliance with required procedures and questioned the legitimacy of certain signatories.

The matter is currently under consideration by the High Court of Malaya in Seremban, with an injunction in place, and all parties are urged to respect the court process.

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 17 — The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) said the Negeri Sembilan state executive council’s media statement or announcement has no legal effect as its members had no jurisdiction, authority or power under the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959 to make it.

The AGC said there was also no legal basis for the state executive council members to rely on the April 19, 2026 proclamation for their announcement, adding that any move to gazette or implement the proclamation would be invalid and unconstitutional.

In a statement today, the AGC said it had taken note of the document titled “Media Statement of the Negeri Sembilan State Executive Council — Decision of the Negeri Sembilan State Executive Council Meeting No. 6 of 2026 (September 15, 2026)”.

It said the Menteri Besar and state executive council did not have unilateral power to terminate or declare vacant the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, while the validity and effect of the proclamation must be determined through a valid constitutional and legal process, particularly under the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959.

The AGC said it had previously given the preliminary view that the April 19 proclamation was invalid because it did not comply with the mandatory requirements under Article 10 of the state constitution, particularly as there was no evidence that any of the disqualifying factors under Article 10(1) applied to Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir.

It said although the Datuk-Datuk Undang have the power to take action to remove the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, Article 10 also provides the procedures and grounds for consideration before such a decision can be made.

“To date, there are no facts indicating that the prescribed procedures have been complied with,” it said.

The AGC also said an issue had arisen over whether some of the Datuk-Datuk Undang who signed the proclamation were lawfully holding office, as they had been removed according to the customary practices of their respective luak.

“The validity of several Undang who signed the proclamation is disputed because their removal was carried out according to the customs of their respective luak,” it said.

“Therefore, the composition of the Undang Yang Empat was in fact incomplete at the material time,” it added.

The AGC said it respected the position of the Datuk-Datuk Undang and acknowledged that the appointment and removal of each of them were subject to the customary rules of their respective luak.

It said the 1959 state constitution also provides for the establishment of the Dewan Undangan dan Keadilan, with Article 16 placing matters concerning Malay customs, including the selection, appointment, placement and removal of Undang, as well as matters brought by the Yang di-Pertuan Besar, under the Dewan’s jurisdiction.

Under Article 16(3), it said, the Dewan’s advice on such matters is final and cannot be challenged or questioned in any court on any grounds.

The AGC also said the matter was currently before the High Court of Malaya in Seremban and that an interlocutory injunction remained in force.

It urged all parties to respect the court process and allow the matter to be resolved in an orderly manner.

Second body recovered as search continues for missing Pulau Ketam anglers

KL to add 49ha of green spaces as city moves to protect open areas, says Hannah Yeoh

Malaysian woman, 40, dies during scuba dive in Bali’s Crystal Bay

总检察署表示，森美兰州行政委员会的公告缺乏1959年森美兰州宪法的法律效力。

该公告没有法律依据，总检察院指出其缺乏必要的程序，并质疑某些签署人的合法性。

目前，该案件正在马来亚高等法院芙蓉分院审理，法院已发出禁令，敦促各方尊重法庭程序。

吉隆坡，9月17日讯——总检察署表示，森美兰州行政委员会的媒体声明或公告不具有法律效力，因为根据1959年森美兰州宪法，其成员没有管辖权、授权或权力作出该声明或公告。

总检察署表示，州行政委员会成员没有法律依据依据 2026 年 4 月 19 日的公告进行宣布，并补充说，任何将该公告公布或实施的举动都将是无效且违宪的。

森美兰州总检察署今天发表声明称，已注意到题为“森美兰州行政议会媒体声明——森美兰州行政议会2026年第6次会议决议（2026年9月15日）”的文件。

声明称，州务大臣和州行政议会无权单方面终止或宣布州元首职位空缺，而该公告的有效性和效力必须通过有效的宪法和法律程序来确定，特别是根据 1959 年森美兰州宪法。

总检察署表示，此前已初步认为 4 月 19 日的公告无效，因为它不符合州宪法第 10 条的强制性要求，特别是没有证据表明第 10(1) 条规定的任何取消资格因素适用于端姑慕赫里兹·端姑慕纳维尔。

它表示，虽然拿督-拿督乌当有权采取行动罢免最高元首，但第 10 条也规定了在做出此类决定之前需要考虑的程序和理由。

声明称：“迄今为止，没有任何事实表明已遵守规定的程序。”

总检察署还表示，一些签署公告的拿督-拿督乌当是否合法任职存在疑问，因为他们已根据各自部落的习俗被免职。

“签署该公告的几位酋长的合法性受到质疑，因为他们的驱逐是按照他们各自部落的习俗进行的。”声明中写道。

“因此，《Undang Yang Empat》的组成在当时实际上是不完整的，”它补充道。

总检察署表示尊重拿督-拿督Undang的地位，并承认每位拿督-拿督Undang的任命和罢免都受其各自luak习俗规则的约束。

声明称，1959 年州宪法也规定设立了 Dewan Undangan dan Keadilan（马来民族委员会），第 16 条规定，与马来习俗有关的事项，包括 Undang 的选拔、任命、安置和罢免，以及由 Yang di-Pertuan Besar（最高元首）提出的事项，均属于 Dewan 的管辖范围。

根据第 16(3) 条规定，迪万就此类事项作出的建议是最终的，任何法院都不得以任何理由对其提出质疑或挑战。

总检察署还表示，该案目前已提交马来亚高等法院（芙蓉）审理，并且临时禁令仍然有效。

它敦促各方尊重法庭程序，让此事以有序的方式得到解决。

在对失踪的吉胆岛垂钓者的搜寻仍在继续之际，已找到第二具遗体。

据Hannah Yeoh报道，吉隆坡将新增49公顷绿地，以保护城市开放空间。

一名40岁的马来西亚女子在巴厘岛水晶湾潜水时溺亡