Ramli Ngah sworn in as Penang governor on Labour Day
GEORGE TOWN: Tun Datuk Seri Utama Ramli Ngah Talib has been sworn in as the ninth Yang di-Pertua Negri on Labour Day.
He succeeded Tun Ahmad Fuzi Abdul Razak, who has served as the eighth Penang governor since 2021.
State secretary Datuk Zulkifli Long announced the appointment while Penang High Court judge Datuk Rozana Ali Yusoff witnessed the swearing-in ceremony held at Dewan Sri Pinang.
Ramli arrived at Dewan Sri Pinang at 8.30am accompanied by his wife Toh Puan Datuk Raja Noora Ashikin Raja Abdullah.
The ceremony started with Ramli inspecting the guard of honour mounted by the Second Battalion of the Malay Regiment, comprising three officers and 103 soldiers led by Major Mohd Salleh Jamal, before being paraded into the ceremonial hall.
Ramli also took the oath as the ninth Yang di-Pertua Negri and signed the instrument of oath of office at the ceremony, witnessed by Rozana and Zulkifli.
After Ramli was sworn in, the pinnacle of the ceremony was followed by 17 cannon shots as a symbolic appointment of the ninth Yang di-Pertua Negri.
During the ceremony, Ramli, 84, received Darjah Utama Pangkuan Negeri (D.U.P.N), which carries the title of Datuk Seri Utama.
Present during the ceremony were Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow, Deputy Chief Minister I Datuk Mohamad Abdul Hamid, Deputy Chief Minister II Jagdeep Singh Deo, and many other dignitaries.
The former Dewan Rakyat speaker received the instrument of appointment from His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, during the Presentation of the Instrument of Appointment Ceremony at Dewan Singgahsana Kecil, Istana Negara, on April 24.
Ramli's appointment as the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Penang was made in accordance with Article 1 of the Constitution of the State of Penang for a term of four years, beginning from May 1, 2025 until April 30, 2029.
He previously held several key positions at both the federal and state levels, including serving as the eighth Mentri Besar of Perak for 17 years, from 1982 to 1999.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysian Reserve
3 hours ago
- Malaysian Reserve
See a newly discovered letter from George Mason to George Washington at the National Press Club's Headliners Coffee & Conversation on June 10
WASHINGTON, June 4, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Gunston Hall's Digital Fellow and Graduate Student Nick Gentry and Senior Curator and Head of Collections Kate Steir, Ph.D. will be at a National Press Club Headliners Coffee and Conversation on Tuesday, June 10 at 10 a.m. They will discuss an unpublished George Mason and George Washington letter discovered by Gentry. The letter, dated April 6, 1768, also features a reply in George Washington's hand dated 1789. Doors open at 9:30 a.m. with a light breakfast of coffee, tea, muffins and pastries. Tickets cost $5 for members of the National Press Club and $15 for the general public. Purchase your ticket here: The text of this letter sheds unexpected light on the private dealings—and quiet tensions—between two pillars of the Revolutionary era: George Washington and George Mason. It adds an additional dimension to the complex personal and political relationship between Mason and Washington—especially considering their later public split over the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The letter reflects Mason's effort to settle a boundary disagreement, referencing surveys, patents, and competing claims from as far back as the 1670s. PRESS CONTACT: Cecily Scott Martin for the National Press Club; cscottmartin@ (202) 662-7525
New Straits Times
16 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Anwar's lawyers to appeal High Court ruling on constitutional reference
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's legal team has expressed disagreement with the High Court's decision to dismiss the prime minister's application to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court. Lawyer Datuk Seri Rajasegaran Krishnan said the questions raised were not abstract or academic in nature. "They concern serious and unresolved constitutional issues, including the protection of executive functions, the risk of politically motivated litigation, and the scope of Articles 5(1), 8(1), 39, 40 and 43 of the Federal Constitution. "This matter involves far-reaching constitutional implications that warrant authoritative clarification by the apex court. "The constitutional questions raised go beyond the facts of this case. They touch on the limits of the legal process, the dignity of high public office, and the structural safeguards embedded in our Constitution," he told reporters after the proceedings. Earlier, judge Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed Anwar's application to refer the constitutional questions to the Federal Court and to stay proceedings in a sexual assault suit filed by his former research officer, Muhammad Yusoff Rawther, in 2021. The trial is set to begin on June 16. The suit was filed before Anwar's appointment as prime minister on Nov 24, 2022. Rajasegaran said they would be filing an immediate appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court's decision. "We will also be applying for a stay of the trial proceedings to preserve the integrity of the appeal process and to ensure that the defendant (Anwar) is not prematurely subjected to proceedings that may ultimately be held to be constitutionally impermissible," he said.
The Star
17 hours ago
- The Star
No complex legal questions in Muhyiddin's sedition case, prosecution argues
KUALA LUMPUR: The prosecution contends that the sedition case involving former prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin does not involve complex or extraordinary questions of law. In an affidavit responding to Muhyiddin's application to refer legal questions related to the Sedition Act 1948 to the Federal Court, the prosecution, as the respondent, stated that various legal issues concerning provisions of the Federal Constitution and the Act have already been decided by higher courts. DPP Datuk Razali Che Ani, in the affidavit, said the issue raised regarding a speech or discussion allegedly falling under Clause 43(2)(a) of the Constitution, read together with Sections 3(2) and 3(3) of the Sedition Act 1948, is a matter of defence. "This issue can be raised by Muhyiddin during the trial and should be decided by the presiding judge after all the respondent's witnesses (prosecution) have testified,' he said in the affidavit. ALSO READ: Muhyiddin's bid to refer questions on Sedition Act to be heard before another judge Razali further stated that the issue is academic as the trial has not yet started, and no evidence has been presented for the court's consideration. He said the prosecution and evidence process for offences under the Act are conducted in accordance with the country's criminal law principles and comply with the Constitution. "It is not in the interest of justice to refer this case to the Federal Court. Therefore, I request that the applicant's (Muhyiddin's) notice of motion be dismissed,' he said. During case management proceedings on Wednesday (June 4), High Court judge Justice Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin set Aug 28 for the hearing of Muhyiddin's application to refer legal questions related to the Sedition Act 1948 to the Federal Court. Muhyiddin's lawyer Joshua Tay and DPP Razali attended. On April 4, Muhyiddin, 77, filed an application to refer a question of law regarding the Sedition Act 1948 to the Federal Court to challenge the validity of certain provisions. He had previously pleaded not guilty to a charge of making seditious remarks while campaigning in conjunction with the Nenggiri state by-election at Dewan Semai Bakti Felda Perasu, between 10.30pm and 11.50pm on Aug 14 last year. The alleged seditious remarks concerned his claim that he was not invited by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be sworn in as prime minister following the 15th General Election, despite allegedly having the support of 115 out of 222 MPs at that time. He is charged under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1948, punishable under Subsection 4(1) of the same Act with a maximum fine of RM5,000 or a maximum imprisonment of three years, or both, if convicted. – Bernama
