Issuance of Correction Direction Under the Protection From Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 Regarding Article Published by Malaysianow on 9 November 2025 Concerning the Treatment of Pannir Selvam A/L Pranthaman

1. The Ministry of Home Affairs is aware of an article published by MalaysiaNow on 9 November 2025 that contains false statements concerning the treatment of Pannir Selvam A/L Pranthaman (“Pannir”).

Falsehoods

2. The article makes the following false statements:

(a) Pannir’s execution was carried out without regard for the rule of law.

(b) The Government’s decision not to issue a certificate of substantive assistance to Pannir was unlawful.

(c) The Central Narcotics Bureau (“ CNB ”) secretly facilitated an interview of Pannir by the Malaysian police.

(d) At the interview, a CNB officer wore a Malaysia police (PDRM) uniform and deliberately hid his identity as a CNB officer.

(e) The Singapore Prison Service (“ SPS ”) officers attempted to mislead Pannir’s family into signing a form stating that all of Pannir’s belongings had been handed over to them.

Facts

All Prisoners Awaiting Capital Punishment (“ PACP ”) Are Afforded Due Legal Process

3. An execution will only be scheduled when a PACP has exhausted all legal processes in relation to his conviction and sentence, and after the issue of clemency has been dealt with. This is the case for all PACPs, including Pannir. The facts of his case are as follows.

4. On 3 September 2014, Pannir was arrested at Woodlands Checkpoint where he was found to be in possession of one packet of granular/powdery substance in the back seat compartment of his motorcycle, and three packets of similar substance concealed at his groin area.

5. On 2 May 2017, the High Court convicted and sentenced him to death for importing into Singapore, not less than 51.84 grammes of diamorphine, or pure heroin, which is sufficient to feed the addiction of about 620 abusers for a week. On 9 February 2018, the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against his conviction and sentence. He was accorded full due process under the law and represented by legal counsel throughout the trial and appeal.

6. Following the dismissal of his appeal, Pannir was involved in 11 post-appeal applications between 2019 and 2025, seven of which were joint applications with other PACPs. All of these applications had concluded by the time of his execution, with the last application dismissed on 7 October 2025.

7. Six petitions for clemency were submitted to the President on his behalf, all of which were rejected.

8. Pannir was first scheduled for execution on 24 May 2019. The execution was stayed because of a last-minute application that he filed to challenge the rejection of his clemency petition. This was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 26 November 2021. Pannir was scheduled for execution a second time on 20 February 2025. He was granted a stay of execution to make another application against his capital sentence. The application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 5 September 2025.

9. It is therefore false and misleading to suggest that the execution of Pannir on 8 October 2025 was carried out without regard for the rule of law. Pannir was accorded full due process under the law, and was scheduled for execution after he had exhausted all legal processes (including the clemency process) in relation to his conviction and sentence.

Pannir Was Not Issued a Certificate of Substantive Assistance (“ CSA ”) as He Had Not Provided Substantive Assistance to CNB

10. Under the law, a person facing a capital charge of drug trafficking or importation may be sentenced to life imprisonment instead of the death penalty, if the following requirements are met: (a) his involvement is limited to that of being a courier (as defined in section 33B(2)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973 (“ MDA ”)); and (b) the Public Prosecutor has issued a CSA to certify to the court that, in his or her determination, the person has substantively assisted CNB in disrupting drug trafficking activities within or outside Singapore.

11. Under section 33B(4) of the MDA, the determination of whether any person has substantively assisted CNB in disrupting drug trafficking activities is at the sole discretion of the Public Prosecutor.

12. Pannir was not issued a CSA as the Public Prosecutor determined that he had not provided substantive assistance to CNB. Pannir’s legal challenge against the Public Prosecutor’s decision not to issue a CSA was also dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 26 November 2021.

13. Contrary to what is stated, Pannir did not provide information that led to the arrest of Zamri Tahir. CNB arrested Zamri Tahir based on information that it already had.

Allegations Against CNB and SPS’S Treatment of Pannir Are False

14. On 27 September 2025, CNB facilitated an interview between the Malaysian Narcotics Crime Investigation Department (“ NCID ”) and Pannir, pursuant to a formal request by NCID. CNB works closely with our overseas counterparts and will facilitate requests, where possible. The interview process was open and aboveboard – SPS had notified Pannir of the interview request. Pannir did not object to being interviewed, nor did he request for his lawyer to be present. Pannir was also not prohibited from consulting his family or his counsel.

15. The NCID officers interviewed Pannir in the presence of a CNB officer, who was not wearing a Malaysian police uniform or posing as a Malaysian police officer. Thus, contrary to what is alleged, Pannir’s counsel was not “excluded”, and the officers’ identities were not concealed.

16. Separately, prior to his execution, Pannir requested to hand over his handwritten letters and poems to his family. SPS reviewed these items and assessed that the content of a few pages affected the security or good order of the prison. These pages were therefore withheld by SPS, as permitted under the law.

17. After Pannir’s execution, SPS officers met with Pannir’s family to hand over Pannir’s belongings and requested for them to sign a form acknowledging that the items indicated on the form were returned to them. Pannir’s family then claimed that some pages of Pannir’s documents were missing. The officers informed them that the documents were screened in accordance with SPS’s screening guidelines and that pages which did not meet the guidelines were withheld. Eventually, Pannir’s family took over Pannir’s belongings without signing the form.

18. At no point did SPS attempt to mislead Pannir’s family into signing a form stating that all of his belongings were returned to them.

Issuance of Correction Direction

19. The Government takes a serious view of the deliberate communication of falsehoods. The Minister for Law and Second Minister for Home Affairs has instructed the POFMA Office to issue a Correction Direction to MalaysiaNow. MalaysiaNow will be required to carry correction notices alongside the article on its website, Facebook, X and LinkedIn posts.

20. The Factually article “Corrections regarding false statements concerning the treatment of Pannir Selvam A/L Pranthaman” can be found here.