The Undang Yang Empat Have a Legitimacy Problem
The actions of Mubarak and the three Undang have damaged their institution. Future Undang will inherit that damage.
On 19 April 2026, four men made a declaration that purported to remove a sitting ruler. The declaration failed to specify any specific offence, required under Article 10 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959, and bypassed the full inquiry it required. One of them, Mubarak, had already been stripped of his own position two days earlier.
Whatever happens next in this crisis, the Undang Yang Empat have created a problem that will not resolve itself easily. They have a legitimacy problem. And legitimacy, once lost, is the hardest thing in the world to rebuild.
What legitimacy actually means
In Adat Perpatih, legitimacy is not a legal technicality. It is not a signature on a document or a gazette entry. It is something deeper and more fundamental; it is the consent, trust and recognition of the people and the traditional structures that give a position its meaning.
The Undang Yang Empat derive their authority not from themselves but from the system around them. From the Ibu Soko who legitimises their positions, from the Lembaga and Buapak who sit below them, from the anak buah whose lives and lands they are entrusted to govern, and from the Yang di-Pertuan Besar above them whose authority they affirm through their presence and loyalty.
Strip away any one of those relationships and the authority of the Undang becomes hollow, a title without substance, a position without meaning.
Unfortunately, the events of April 2026 strained all of them simultaneously.
What they have lost
They lost the Ibu Soko.
The Ibu Soko Klana Hulu of Sungei Ujong said she never gave Mubarak a mandate for the declaration (Malay Mail, 20 April 2026). The Ibu Soko and Anak Waris of all four Luak then submitted a formal memorandum of support for Tuanku Muhriz (Malay Mail, 20 April 2026). The Ibu Soko Tua of Rembau claimed the installation of the Undang of Rembau was procedurally invalid, citing a lack of muafakat from the principal Anak Waris (Negeri Kita, 8 May 2026). In a system where the Ibu Soko's blessing is foundational for any major Adat action, the Undang are finding their own legitimacy examined.
They lost the legal community.
Former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, himself an anak Negeri Sembilan whose great-great-grandfather was the Undang of Johol, published a devastating three-point demolition of the declaration in The Edge, identifying the absence of due process, the participation of a biased party (Mubarak), and the missing Menteri Besar signature as grounds rendering the proclamation legally unenforceable. Senior constitutional lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar concluded in Free Malaysia Today that none of the Article X pre-conditions had been satisfied and that "there is in reality no constitutional crisis" in Negeri Sembilan. The weight of serious legal opinion is firmly against them (The Edge Malaysia, 23 April 2026, Free Malaysia Today, 23 April 2026).
They lost the state government.
The Menteri Besar was unequivocal from the first hour. The state government rejected the declaration outright and declined to act on it. Article 10(2) requires any proclamation removing the Yang di-Pertuan Besar to be issued under the hands of both the Undangs and the Menteri Besar, and the MB has refused to sign. Without the MB's signature, the proclamation cannot proceed to gazettal, and an ungazetted proclamation carries no operative effect in state administration. (Free Malaysia Today, 20 April 2026).
They lost the public.
Most damagingly of all, they lost the people. Social media, which in any previous era would have been managed through official channels and editorial caution, gave Malaysians an unfiltered view of what happened. And what they saw was a sacked Undang reading a Facebook Live declaration against a ruler without naming a single specific offence. This looked less like the principled exercise of constitutional authority and more like what one anak nogori put it simply as: gilo koso. Translation: Mad for power.
The specific problem of each Undang
Datuk Mubarak Dohak faces the most acute legitimacy crisis of the four. He was already removed from his position before he signed the declaration. His participation in a constitutional act after his own removal makes every subsequent action legally and customarily void. He cannot rebuild legitimacy because he no longer holds the position from which legitimacy flows.
Read: What Are the 33 Offences Against Mubarak?
Datuk Maarof Mat Rashad (the Undang of Jelebu) faces questions that go beyond this crisis. Public SSM records and a letter on official Balai Undang letterhead raise serious questions about the granting of rare earth mining rights to a company in which he subsequently became a shareholder, before quietly exiting one month before the crisis. These questions have not been answered. They will not simply disappear.
Read: What Are the Corruption Allegations Against the Undang of Jelebu?
Datuk Muhammed Abdullah (the Undang of Johol) has been associated with the financial controversy surrounding the two dismissed Dato’-Dato’ Lembaga who allegedly formed an unauthorised council and received RM160,000 from the Negeri Sembilan Museum Board. His credibility is entangled in a dispute that the courts and SPRM may yet be asked to examine.
Read: Who Is the Undang of Johol and Why Do 70 Companies Raise Questions That Demand Answers?
Datuk Abdul Rahim Yasin (the Undang of Rembau) was installed in September 2024, barely seven months before signing the declaration, but his installation was challenged by the Ibu Soko Tua of Luak Rembau on 8 May 2026 as procedurally invalid under Adat.
Read: Who Is the Undang of Rembau and Was His Appointment Legitimate?
Can legitimacy be rebuilt?
Legitimacy in Adat Perpatih is rebuilt through the same mechanism by which it is established: muafakat (consensus). Open deliberation. Honest engagement. The willingness to sit with the people below you, the Ibu Soko beside you, and the ruler above you, and to work through disagreement within the framework of the system rather than around it.
That would require the Undang to admit that the process they followed was wrong, even if they maintain that their underlying grievances were legitimate. It would require them to submit to the constitutional framework rather than claiming to stand above it. None of that appears imminent.
The deeper question
The legitimacy problem of the current Undang Yang Empat1 raises a question that goes beyond this particular crisis: what happens to an institution when it is seen to act against the very principles that give it meaning?
The Undang Yang Empat exist, constitutionally and customarily, to be the guardians of Negeri Sembilan’s unique Adat system. They are the kingmakers, the four men whose collective wisdom is supposed to ensure that the Yang di-Pertuan Besar is chosen and held accountable in accordance with centuries of tradition.
When those four men are seen to have acted without the Ibu Soko’s mandate, without proper process, without naming a single specific offence, and in the case of one of them without even holding a valid position, the institution itself is damaged.
Future Undang will inherit that damage and the trust deficit will outlast the individuals who created it.
What Negeri Sembilan needs now
Negeri Sembilan’s Adat system is genuinely extraordinary. It is one of the few matrilineal royal systems in the world. It has survived for centuries precisely because it balances power between the ruler, the traditional chiefs and the people in a way that no single party can dominate.
That balance is what was damaged in April 2026.
Restoring it requires more than a resolution of the immediate constitutional dispute. It requires the Undang, whoever they are, now and in the future, to recommit to the principles that give their position meaning. Transparency. Process. Muafakat (consensus). Accountability.
Adat bukan hak mutlak. Adat adalah amanah. Adat is not an absolute right. Adat is a trust.
The chain of legitimacy runs in both directions. They tried to break it from the top. It is now breaking under them.
Read Next: When Have Undangs Been Removed Before?
Footnote:
1This publication uses the term "Undang Yang Empat" both for the centuries-old institution of the four ruling chiefs and, as shorthand, for the four individuals who signed the 19 April declaration. Mubarak Dohak ceased to hold office as Undang of Luak Sungei Ujong on 17 April 2026, his removal having occurred under the custom of the luak. The Dewan Keadilan dan Undang (DKU) acknowledged that removal as a question of Malay custom under Article 16 of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959, two days before the declaration was signed. Under Article 16(3), DKU advice on such questions is final and cannot be challenged in any court.
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.
Related Posts:
Sources:
Four Undangs Skip Negeri Sembilan Assembly Opening as Royal Row Lingers (Malay Mail, 23 April 2026)
Ibu Soko Tua dakwa ada kecacatan Adat dalam pemilihan Undang Rembau (Negeri Kita, 8 May 2026)
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.
