Lawyers ask Conference of Rulers to step in over royal crisis

Three lawyers specializing in Negeri Sembilan's customs have petitioned the Conference of Rulers to step in and investigate the ongoing royal crisis in the state. The Conference of Rulers, possessing a unique authority over matters concerning Malaysia's royal institution, its position, privileges, and honor, has been asked to evaluate and advise on the legitimacy of recent actions, including the purported removal of the Yang Dipertuan Besar and the appointment of a successor.

According to Emirul Sarifudin Nor Azmi, Asmawi Ismail, and Deidra Nur Azmi, if the actions taken by the state were not conducted in accordance with the state constitution and rule of law, the Conference of Rulers should be consulted. They expressed hope that the rulers would examine the matter fairly and swiftly to safeguard the ruler's rights and the integrity of the Negeri Sembilan constitution.

The lawyers argued that federal bodies, such as the prime minister or the Attorney-General's Chambers, do not have the authority to intervene in the Negeri Sembilan crisis. On September 17, the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) rejected a proclamation attempting to remove Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir as Negeri Sembilan's Yang Dipertuan Besar, as well as a subsequent statement by the state executive council confirming the decision.

The AGC declared the proclamation invalid and stated that the menteri besar and exco members lacked unilateral power to remove the ruler.

Legal expert Aziz Bari urged the Conference of Rulers to convene a special meeting to resolve the deadlock in Negeri Sembilan. Bari emphasized that the Conference of Rulers is ideally situated to propose solutions that could resolve the issue. Constitutional lawyer Bastian Pius Vendargon pointed out that Article 34 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959 permits constitutional questions to be referred to the apex court for adjudication.

According to Vendargon, Article 34(3) grants the state ruler the power to refer constitutional questions to the Federal Court, which must then provide an opinion on the matter.