This is an unofficial English translation. Where there is any discrepancy, the original Malay document prevails.
These documents were obtained on Facebook and the authenticity of the document translated here has not been independently verified by this publication. Its contents are presented as the sworn evidence of the deponent alone, untested in court, with no affidavit in reply filed at the date of this translation. Personal identification details have been redacted.
English Translation:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR IN THE FEDERAL TERRITORY JUDICIAL REVIEW NO: [BLANK ON FORM] 2026
In the matter of Order 53 rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court 2012; AND in the matter of an application for an Order of Declaration and Mandamus; AND in the matter of the Federal guarantee in respect of State Constitutions under Article 71(2) of the Federal Constitution; AND in the matter of Articles 10(1)(b) and (2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959; AND in the matter of Article 11 of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959; AND in the matter of Order 92 rule 4 of the Rules of Court 2012; AND in the matter of section 25 and the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964; AND in the matter of section 44 of the Specific Relief Act 1950; AND in the matter of the Plaintiffs’ letter to the First Defendant dated 20 April 2026.
BETWEEN
YTM Dato’ Klana Petra, Dato’ Haji Mubarak Bin Thahak
YTM Dato’ Mendika Menteri Akhirulzaman, Dato’ Maarof Bin Haji Mat Rashad
YTM Dato Johan Pahlawan Lela Perkasa Sitiawan, Dato’ Muhammed Bin Haji Abdullah
YTM Dato’ Sedia Raja, Dato’ Haji Abdul Rahim Bin Haji Yasin … PLAINTIFFS
AND
Menteri Besar Negeri Sembilan
Government of Negeri Sembilan … DEFENDANTS
Supporting affidavit
We, Dato’ Johan Pahlawan Lela Perkasa Sitiawan Dato’ Muhammed Bin Haji Abdullah (identity card number omitted), a Malaysian citizen of full age with an address for service at Balai Undang Luak Johol, 73100 Johol, Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus, do solemnly affirm and state as follows:
1. We are the Third Plaintiff in this Action and affirm this Affidavit by the sabda (pronouncement) and with the unanimous consent of the Plaintiffs.
2. All the facts stated in this Supporting Affidavit are true according to my personal knowledge and/or from documents in my possession to which I have access, and information based on advice, legal advice and my belief, unless otherwise stated.
3. We are the Undang Luak Johol, established under Article 14(1) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959, and affirm as follows:
(i) The First Plaintiff is the Undang Luak Sungei Ujong, established under Article 14(1) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
(ii) The Second Plaintiff is the Undang Luak Jelebu, established under Article 14(1) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
(iii) The Fourth Plaintiff is the Undang Luak Rembau, established under Article 14(1) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
4. The Plaintiffs are the Ruler of the State of Negeri Sembilan together with the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan under Articles 28(1) and 28(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
5. The First Defendant is the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan, who bears the public responsibility of carrying out all Constitutional duties under the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
6. The Second Defendant is the Government of Negeri Sembilan, which bears the public responsibility of carrying out all Constitutional duties under the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
The events of 5 March 2026
7. We solemnly state that on 5 March 2026 a meeting of the Dewan Keadilan dan Undang was held at Istana Besar Seri Menanti, chaired by the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan.
8. We state that we, together with the First Plaintiff, the Second Plaintiff, Tunku Besar Tampin and the Dato’ Shahbandar Sungei Ujong, attended that meeting of the Dewan Keadilan dan Undang.
9. We state that the atmosphere of the DKU meeting that day was somewhat tense when the First Plaintiff raised several acts of administrative and customary misconduct committed by the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan.
10. We state that the DKU meeting was also attended by the Defendants, together with the State Legal Adviser and the Mufti of the Government of Negeri Sembilan.
11. We state that, in order to ease the tension of the DKU meeting, We together with the First Plaintiff and the Second Plaintiff left the meeting and reconvened at Balai Undang Sungei Ujong for a continued meeting.
12. We state that at that continued meeting, We, the First Plaintiff and the Second Plaintiff discussed again in detail all the administrative and customary wrongs committed by Tuanku Muhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir, and decided that His Royal Highness was no longer qualified to continue holding the title of the 11th Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan.
13. We state that the Defendants also attended the continued meeting at Balai Undang Sungei Ujong, at which the Second Defendant was represented by the State Secretary of Negeri Sembilan, in addition to the State Legal Adviser of Negeri Sembilan.
14. We state that the First Plaintiff then pronounced (mensabdakan) to the Defendants that they should carry out the Defendants’ Constitutional duties under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan, the Plaintiffs having completed the Plaintiffs’ Constitutional duties under Article 10(1)(b) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
15. We state that after being so pronounced to by the First Plaintiff, the First Defendant stated that he agreed and would discuss the matter with the Second Defendant and the State Legal Adviser for further action.
16. However, after the Defendants left Balai Undang Sungei Ujong, and even after several days had passed, no action to issue the Proclamation of removal of Tuanku Muhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959 was taken by the Defendants.
The events of 19 April 2026
17. We solemnly state that owing to the failure of the Defendants to carry out their Constitutional duties promptly under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959, on 19 April 2026 the Plaintiffs gathered at Balai Undang Sungei Ujong and issued a Sabda concerning Article 10 of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959, namely the Proclamation of Removal of His Royal Highness the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan, Tunku Muhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir.
A copy of the said Sabda is exhibited as exhibit DMA-1.
18. We state that among the important contents of Exhibit DMA-1 are the following:
(i) That on 5 March 2026, the Plaintiffs held a sitting and a full and complete enquiry under Article 10(1) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959 concerning the misconduct of DYMM Tuanku Muhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir in carrying out his responsibilities as the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan;
(ii) That after holding the full and complete enquiry above, the Plaintiffs were satisfied that the acts of misconduct committed by Tuanku Muhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir were done deliberately, and had resulted in the sanctity, honour, dignity and good name of the institution of the Ruler in Negeri Sembilan being defiled and brought into contempt;
(iii) That by the power held by the Plaintiffs under Article 10(1)(b) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959, the Plaintiffs requested that Tuanku Muhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir abdicate the throne of the State and relinquish his sovereignty, rights, powers and precedence as the 11th Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan;
(iv) That a Proclamation concerning this removal, under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959, which is to be signed by the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, will be issued later.
19. We state that, by a letter dated 20 April 2026 to the Defendant, the Confidential Secretary to the First Plaintiff delivered the Proclamation document under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959 for signature by the Defendant.
A copy of the proof of service of the letter dated 20 April 2026 on the Defendant is exhibited as exhibit DMA-2.
20. We state that up to the date of filing of this Judicial Review Action, the Defendant has refused, neglected and/or disregarded the Plaintiffs’ Constitutional request that the Defendant sign the proclamation document under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
Procedural impropriety, irrationality and legitimate expectation
21. We state that by the failure of the First Defendant to sign the Proclamation document concerned, the Defendants have committed procedural impropriety in carrying out their Responsibilities under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959;
22. We state that by the failure of the First Defendant to sign the Proclamation document concerned, the Defendants have acted irrationally in carrying out their Responsibilities under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959;
23. We state that the Plaintiffs, after carrying out the Plaintiffs’ responsibilities under Article 10(1)(b) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959, hold a Legitimate Expectation that the Defendants would carry out their responsibilities under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
24. We state that the Plaintiffs have discharged their Constitutional obligation by signing the Proclamation of Removal as at exhibit DMA-1 above.
25. We solemnly believe and say that, other than by an Order of Mandamus from this Honourable Court, the Defendant will not sign the Proclamation document at exhibit DMA-2 concerned.
26. We therefore apply for the following Orders:
(a) A Declaration that the Proclamation Document at annexure DMA-1 is a valid Proclamation document under Articles 10(1)(b) and 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959.
(b) An Order of Mandamus directing the First Defendant to sign the Proclamation document at exhibit DMA-2 under Article 10(2) of the Constitution of Negeri Sembilan 1959 within 7 days of the Order of this Honourable Court.
(c) Costs,
(d) Such other Relief as this honourable court considers fit, just and appropriate.
Affirmed by YTM Dato' Johan Pahlawan Lela Perkasa Sitiawan Dato' Muhammed Bin Haji Abdullah on 17 July 2026 at Seremban. The attestation block records that no interpretation was required, the deponent reading the language of the affidavit. Before me, Commissioner for Oaths No. N 083, Rodiah bt Mohamed, commission period 1.1.2025 to 31.12.2027, of 141A Jalan Dato Bandar Tunggal, 70000 Seremban, Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus. [Seal of the Undang Luak Johol and seal of the Commissioner for Oaths appear on the original.]
Notes on the translation. The affidavit uses the first person plural “Kami” throughout, which is rendered here as “We”. Sabda denotes a pronouncement by a person holding customary authority and is left untranslated, as is Luak, a territorial and customary unit of Negeri Sembilan, and Balai Undang, the hall of an Undang. The Constitution numbers its Articles in Roman numerals. This publication uses Arabic numerals for readability. Paragraph 3 of the original lists the First, Second and Fourth Plaintiffs at sub-paragraphs (i) to (iii) and does not list a Third Plaintiff separately, the deponent being the Third Plaintiff. Paragraphs 19, 25 and 26(b) refer to exhibit DMA-2, which paragraph 19 describes as proof of service rather than as the Proclamation document itself.
Provenance. The document translated here purports to be the supporting affidavit filed in judicial review WA-25-201-07/2026 at the High Court of Malaya at Kuala Lumpur, affirmed on 17 July 2026. The copy from which this translation was made carries no eFiling serial number, and its authenticity has not been independently verified by this publication. The case number, the parties, the filing date and the orders sought correspond to the application document retrieved through the judiciary’s document verification portal. The exhibits referred to as DMA-1 and DMA-2 are filed separately and are not part of this document.
Related Posts:
If you are new to this Substack, and are not sure where to begin, visit our Start Here page, where we list all our articles organised by theme.
Anak Nogori is independent commentary on the unfolding constitutional crisis in Negeri Sembilan, where centuries-old Adat Perpatih, royal succession law, and modern political manoeuvring are colliding in ways Malaysia has never seen before. If you find this useful, share it with someone who should be following this, or subscribe to receive the latest articles in your inbox.
