What is Article 10 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959
Article 10 sets out the only circumstances in which the Undangs may call upon the Yang di-Pertuan Besar to step back from his duties or to give up the throne, and the conditions that must be satisfied
What each clause means
Article 10(1): The conditions, the grounds, and the call.
This is one very long sentence in the printed text, and it does three separate things. Taken apart, it reads more easily.
First, a condition that must be satisfied before anything else happens. The matter must be “considered and determined after full and complete enquiry by the Undangs”. An enquiry comes first. Whatever follows depends on it having taken place.
Second, the grounds. The enquiry must find one of the following. The grounds are specific and limited:
that His Highness, after his appointment, has developed a great and serious defect derogatory to the qualities of a Yang di-Pertuan Besar, such as insanity, blindness or dumbness
that he has become possessed of a base quality on account of which the Hukum Syarak (Islamic law) would not permit him to be Yang di-Pertuan Besar
that he has done an overt act detrimental to the sanctity, honour and dignity of a Yang di-Pertuan Besar
that he has deliberately disregarded the provisions of the Constitution
The words “after His appointment” do quiet work. Article 10 addresses what has happened since he took the throne. A grievance predating the appointment is not what this Article is for.
Third, what the Undangs may then do. They may call upon him either to withdraw from performing his duties for a period they determine, under 10(1)(a), or to abdicate and relinquish his prerogatives, rights, powers and privileges, under 10(1)(b). The choice between the two belongs to the Undangs.
The question of whether the requirements of Article 10(1) were in fact satisfied in any particular case is a separate issue.
Article 10(2): What follows the call.
If the call is to withdraw, His Highness ceases to exercise the functions and powers of Ruler for the period determined, and a Regent or Council of Regency exercises them in the meantime. If the call is to abdicate, he “shall thereupon cease to be Yang di-Pertuan Besar”.
That is a powerful sentence, and it is worth reading slowly. The cessation follows from the call itself. Nothing further is required to make it effective. Which is precisely why everything in 10(1) matters so much.
If a valid call ends a reign, then whether a call is valid is the whole question, and validity depends on two things: that a full and complete enquiry was held on one of the four grounds, and that the persons making the call were the Undangs.
The proviso: the proclamation. A proclamation “shall be issued under the hands of the Undangs and the Menteri Besar” as soon as possible thereafter. “Under the hands of” means signed by. The proclamation must therefore carry the signatures of the Undangs and of the Menteri Besar, and this is the only point in Article 10 at which the Menteri Besar appears.
Because the proclamation comes afterwards, it records the cessation rather than bringing it about. What the Constitution does not address is what happens when a Menteri Besar declines to sign one.
What Article 10 does not say
It says nothing about the Dewan Keadilan dan Undang (DKU). The DKU is nowhere in Article 10. Its advisory function under Article 16 runs to questions of Malay custom, including the election, succession, removal and vacation of office of the Ruling Chiefs.
The Yang di-Pertuan Besar is a separate constitutional office and is not included within the Constitution's definition of "Ruling Chiefs". Article 34 defines “Ruling Chiefs” as the four Undangs together with the Tunku Besar Tampin. The DKU therefore has no stated role in the removal of a Ruler, and the Undangs have no stated role in the removal of one of their own.
It says nothing about the Tunku Besar Tampin. The power under Article 10 belongs to “the Undangs”, which Article 34 defines as the Ruling Chiefs excluding the Tunku Besar Tampin. Four men hold this power, and the fifth Ruling Chief does not.
It gives the Dato' Shahbandar of Sungai Ujong no role. The Dato' Shahbandar is a member of the DKU under Article 17 and, under Article 15, must be consulted by the Undang of Sungei Ujong on matters affecting the affairs of the Luak. Article 10 confers nothing on him.
It does not define “full and complete enquiry”. The Constitution prescribes no procedure, no form of notice, and no right of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar to be heard. The requirement is stated and left undefined, and that silence has never been tested.
It does not answer the prior question of who is an Undang. Article 10 assumes the answer and proceeds. Who lawfully holds each of the four chieftainships is settled elsewhere, under the custom of each Luak, with the DKU advising under Article 16. Article 10 cannot be reached until that question is closed.
It provides no power to install a successor. Article 10 ends the reign, in the circumstances it describes. The election of a new Yang di-Pertuan Besar is governed by Article 11, and the persons eligible are those set out in Article 7.
Articles Referencing Article 10:
What Is the Negeri Sembilan Royal Crisis and Why Does It Matter?
How Social Media has Influenced the Negeri Sembilan Royal Crisis
What the Constitution Actually Says About Removing a Yang di-Pertuan Besar: Liyana Marzuki
Proper Processes Exist to Remove a MB and YDPB, They Were Not Followed: Anthony Loke
Can Negeri Sembilan’s Ruling Chiefs Suspend the DKU Secretary and Convene Their Own Sitting?
An Anonymous Law Review’s Case Against Tuanku Muhriz Examined
Source:
Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959
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.
