
Unique rotating monarchy
IN a world where monarchs are typically born into power, Malaysia stands out with a unique rotation system where its King is elected from among nine Malay Rulers.
Malaysia is one of over 40 nations with a constitutional monarchy, but it is the only one in the world that practises a five-year rotation system.
Under this unique system, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is elected from among nine Malay Rulers under the Conference of Rulers through a detailed election process that takes place every five years.
Only nine Malay Rulers are eligible to take part in the process, namely the Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negri Sembilan, Sultan of Selangor, Raja of Perlis, Sultan of Terengganu, Sultan of Kedah, Sultan of Kelantan, Sultan of Pahang, Sultan of Johor and Sultan of Perak.
Several other eligibility criteria that must be met for a Ruler to be appointed as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong are also outlined on the official website of the Keeper of the Rulers' Seal Office.
The first is that the Ruler must consent to be elected, and only the nine Malay Rulers may vote.
If a Ruler is unable to attend the Election Meeting, he may appoint another Ruler as a proxy to vote on his behalf.
Previously, the selection of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong was based on seniority, whereby the Ruler who had reigned the longest was considered the most senior.
However, that rule no longer applies since all nine Malay Rulers have taken their turns as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Sultan of Perak Almarhum Sultan Azlan Muhibbuddin Shah, who was the ninth Yang di-Pertuan Agong, was the last Ruler to be selected under the original rotation system.
After that, the Rulers collectively agreed on a rotation list, which is still used today, based on the order of states whose Rulers had previously served as Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Besides that, Schedule Three of the Federal Constitution and the Regulation of the Conference of Rulers states that a Ruler is not eligible for election if he is a minor or has formally informed the Keeper of the Rulers' Seal that he does not wish to be elected.
It adds that a Ruler is also disqualified if the Conference of Rulers, through a secret ballot, determines that he is unfit due to infirmity of mind or body, or for any other reason that would prevent him from fulfilling the role.
However, such a resolution must be supported by at least five members of the Conference of Rulers.
Schedule Three of the Federal Constitution also provides detailed steps to be taken before the election of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, including for the nine Rulers to agree on the date of the Election Meeting.
If both the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Deputy Yang di-Pertuan Agong positions become vacant, the election must be held within four weeks from the date the vacancies occur.
The Keeper of the Rulers' Seal will then seek the consent of each Ruler to be nominated as either the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or Deputy Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Any Ruler who does not wish to be nominated must submit a written notice to the Keeper of the Rulers' Seal, and the state will be moved to the end of the nomination list.
When the Conference of Rulers convenes to vote, only the Malay Rulers, the Keeper of the Rulers' Seal and the assistant secretary to the Conference of Rulers are involved in the process.
The four Yang di-Pertua Negeri do not attend despite being members of the Conference of Rulers.
The election is conducted through a secret ballot using unnumbered papers, all marked with the same pen and ink.
The completed ballots are placed into a ballot box and once the result is announced, the papers are destroyed (either burned or shredded) in the presence of the Rulers.
The Ruler with the shortest reign, who is not nominated as a candidate for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or Deputy Yang di-Pertuan Agong, is appointed to assist the Keeper of the Rulers' Seal in counting the ballots.
During the election, each Ruler receives a ballot bearing the name of one candidate and is asked to indicate whether that candidate is suitable to serve as Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
The nominee must secure at least five votes before being offered the post by the presiding Ruler. If the nominee declines or fails to secure enough votes, the process continues with the next most senior Ruler on the list.
The election concludes only after a nominee accepts the appointment.
The Conference of Rulers then formally declares the Ruler as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, who will serve for a five-year term.
His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, the current King of Malaysia, was sworn in as the 17th Yang di-Pertuan Agong on Jan 31, 2024, following the 263rd (Special) Meeting of the Conference of Rulers in October 2023. His Majesty's installation ceremony took place on July 20, 2024.
This marks the second time a Johor Ruler has been installed as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Sultan Ibrahim's father, Almarhum Sultan Iskandar Sultan Ismail, had reigned as the eighth Yang di-Pertuan Agong from 1984 to 1989.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sinar Daily
an hour ago
- Sinar Daily
Prime Minister is not above the law
Hamzah Zainudin. KUALA LUMPUR - Opposition leader Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin has reminded that the Prime Minister is not above the law and should not use his position to shield himself from legal proceedings, especially in the eyes of both the people and the international community. In a statement on Friday, Hamzah stressed the importance of upholding justice, saying that dignity and accountability go hand in hand for any national leader. He criticised the move by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's legal team to file an extraordinary application to refer eight legal questions to the Federal Court, including the matter of immunity in a civil lawsuit filed by former aide Muhammed Yusoff Rawther. Hamzah criticised the move by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's legal team to file an extraordinary application to refer eight legal questions to the Federal Court, including the matter of immunity in a civil lawsuit filed by former aide Muhammed Yusoff Rawther (in white).. 'Defending the honour of a leader, particularly the Prime Minister, is important because it reflects the authority of the nation. However, at the same time, the supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law must be upheld 'Those in power must never abuse the justice system because doing so would erode public trust in the leadership and the country's legal institutions,' he warned. He reminded that the courts are the rightful avenue for individuals to defend themselves fairly under the law, and any failure to uphold justice could lead to perceptions of double standards. He warned that such a scenario would erode public trust and send a signal to foreign investors that the country operates without proper legal order. The Larut Member of Parliament (MP) added that such actions could have a lasting impact on Malaysia's stability and economic growth. Citing Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution, he said: 'All individuals are equal before the law and entitled to equal protection under it. If this right is denied, the people will rebel and the system will collapse. 'The position of Prime Minister does not provide immunity from the law. In this case, he must defend his personal honour and the integrity of the Prime Minister's institution, not seek immunity from the court. 'The role of Prime Minister is a trust given by Allah SWT, for which one will be held accountable not only in this world, but also in the hereafter,' he said. More Like This


New Straits Times
5 hours ago
- New Straits Times
TNB ordered to pay RM547k in late interest to landowner
PUTRAJAYA: Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) has been ordered to pay RM547,105 in late payment interest to a company for delays in compensating it for land used in a transmission line project. A three-member Court of Appeal panel led by Federal Court judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng said the national utility giant must pay the sum to Lambang Kelana Sdn Bhd after finding that the company had been unfairly deprived of its money for over five years due to administrative delays. Other members of the bench were Court of Appeal judges Datuk Azimah Omar and Datuk Wong Kian Kheong. According to court documents, in 2007, TNB had prematurely entered Lambang Kelana's land without due compliance with wayleave procedures under Section 11 of the Electricity Supply Act to install electrical infrastructure. The section stipulates that utility companies must follow specific procedures before entering private land to install or build electrical infrastructure, including giving formal notice to landowners and paying full compensation for any disturbance or loss of use of the land. Lambang Kelana was neither served the statutory notice nor paid proper compensation for the loss of the portion of land acquired as wayleave for TNB. The dispute led to a protracted legal battle, and TNB only paid RM2.1 million in compensation in 2020. However, the payment did not include any interest for the long delay. In 2021, the Negri Sembilan State Authority decided that Lambang Kelana should receive RM1,369,332.95 in late payment interest for the delay in compensation from October 2015 to December 2020. However, TNB filed a judicial review to challenge the decision in the High Court and succeeded in getting it overturned. Azimah, who delivered the unanimous decision in dismissing the lower court's ruling, said the trial judge had misinterpreted the law by adopting a narrow and literal reading of the relevant provisions. "To deprive the appellant of its rightful late payment charges would certainly transgress upon the appellant's constitutional rights safeguarded under Article 13(2) of the Federal Constitution. "Despite the delay caused by the Land Administrator, TNB was still unjustly enriched by being able to utilise and earn interest on the monies that were supposed to be paid to Lambang Kelana for the entire duration of the delay," she said. The appellate court said any interpretation of the law that allows government authorities or licensees to delay compensation with impunity would be unjust. "We are certain that no statute ever legislated within our nation would promote a statutory authority to delay justice with impunity at the expense of unjust losses incurred against innocent landowners. "If that be the case, then TNB would stand to unjustly benefit by holding onto monies that should have been paid to landowners, courtesy of delays by the Land Administrator. "In the meantime, the Land Administrator would not suffer a single sen for the entire duration of the delay. The only party to suffer losses would be the landowner. "Such an interpretation would truly be absurd and unjust," the court added. The court also did not make any order for costs. Lambang Kelana was represented by lawyers Yeoh Cho Kheong and T. Subbbiah, while lawyer David Dinesh Mathew appeared for TNB.


The Sun
7 hours ago
- The Sun
AGC denies claims Anwar's pardon was invalid
KUALA LUMPUR: The Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) today denied that the pardon granted to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was invalid. In a statement, the AGC said this was because Anwar had been granted a full pardon by the Pardons Board for the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, which convened on May 16, 2018. 'The AGC affirms that the 51st Meeting of the Pardons Board for the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya was held on Wednesday, May 16, 2018, at 11 am at Istana Negara, Kuala Lumpur. 'The meeting was chaired by His Majesty the 15th Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Muhammad V, and was also attended, among others, by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad himself, who was the Prime Minister at the time,' the AGC stated. According to the statement, based on the advice of the Pardons Board, Sultan Muhammad V consented to the granting of a full pardon to Anwar, along with his immediate release, effective from the date of the Pardons Board meeting. The statement added that for the purpose of the meeting, the Attorney General had also provided a written opinion on the matter in accordance with Clause (9), Article 42 of the Federal Constitution for the Pardons Board's consideration. Therefore, the AGC refuted the remarks made by Dr Mahathir, in which the former Prime Minister publicly claimed that the pardon was invalid as it did not go through a proper Pardons Board proceeding. In this connection, the AGC views the matter seriously as it involves constitutional and institutional interests. 'The AGC also emphasises that any statement that could mislead the public regarding the decision of the Pardons Board is completely inappropriate,' the statement said.