Malaysian national Pannir Selvam Pranthaman, sentenced to death in 2017 for importing 51.84g of heroin into Singapore, was granted a stay of execution on February 19. This ruling follows the introduction of the Post-Appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act (PACC), which took effect in June 2024, providing clearer legal guidelines on post-appeal applications for death row inmates.
Pannir was scheduled for execution on February 20, but the Court of Appeal allowed him to file applications challenging his sentence on two key grounds. First, he has lodged a complaint with the Law Society against his former lawyer, alleging misconduct. Second, a constitutional challenge against the presumptions in the Misuse of Drugs Act is ongoing, which could potentially impact his conviction.
Complaint Against Former Lawyer
One of Pannir’s arguments revolves around his former lawyer, Mr. Ong Ying Ping. He claims Mr. Ong pressured him into signing a notice to act in person and withdrew legal representation just three days before an important hearing in August 2024. In September 2024, Pannir provided a detailed account of this alleged misconduct to his new lawyer, Mr. Too Xing Ji.
Justice Woo Bih Li noted that the Law Society had officially referred Pannir’s complaint for further review on January 13, 2025. While the complaint itself does not affect his conviction or sentence, the judge ruled that there was a reasonable prospect of success in his claim. He also pointed out that Pannir had acted promptly in filing his complaint, countering any suggestion that it was merely a delay tactic to avoid execution.
Challenge to the Misuse of Drugs Act
The second major factor in the stay of execution is a constitutional challenge to the Misuse of Drugs Act’s presumptions. Under Section 18(1), anyone found in possession of a controlled substance is automatically presumed to have had knowledge of the drug unless they can prove otherwise.
Four other convicted drug traffickers had challenged this legal presumption, arguing that it violates the constitutionally protected principle of innocence until proven guilty. Although they lost their case in the High Court in November 2024, the Court of Appeal invited further submissions on January 23, 2025.
Justice Woo pointed out that while Pannir is not directly involved in that case, his conviction was also based on the same legal presumption. If the constitutional challenge succeeds, it could have a fundamental impact on his case. The judge, therefore, found that this issue also had a reasonable chance of success and warranted delaying Pannir’s execution.
The PACC Law and Its Impact
Pannir’s stay of execution is one of the first granted under the Post-Appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act (PACC), which was passed in November 2022 and came into effect in June 2024. The law aims to prevent abuse of the legal system while ensuring that death row inmates have a clear process for filing last-resort appeals.
Under PACC, the Court of Appeal is the sole authority in deciding whether new applications can be heard. The court must assess whether the applications have a reasonable chance of success and whether the inmate has delayed filing them unnecessarily. In Pannir’s case, both conditions were met.
What’s Next?
With the stay granted, Pannir’s applications will be heard in due course. If he succeeds in his claims against his former lawyer, it could raise questions about the fairness of his trial. Meanwhile, the constitutional challenge to the Misuse of Drugs Act could have far-reaching implications for Singapore’s strict drug laws.
While the execution is postponed, there is no guarantee that Pannir will ultimately avoid the death penalty. His case highlights the complexities of Singapore’s legal framework surrounding drug offences and the death penalty, as well as the safeguards in place to ensure fair judicial processes.
Comments
Post a Comment