A Malaysian man scheduled for hanging in Singapore on May 24 was granted a stay of execution by the Court of Appeal at the last minute, CNA reported.

According to Bernama, 31-year-old Pannir Selvam Pranthaman will now be allowed to mount a challenge against the clemency process, as per his application to the Court of Appeals.

This was after his hanging was halted barely a day before it was scheduled to take place.

His application to the Court of Appeal for the stay of execution was heard by Chief Justice Sundraresh Menon, and two Judges of Appeal, Judith Prakash and Steven Chong.

Other than applying for a stay of execution, the application also touched on the Singapore attorney-general’s refusal to issue a certificate of assistance that would have commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment, The Malay Mail reported.

Convicted of drugs

Pannir was convicted on June 27, 2017, for carrying 51.84g of heroin at Woodlands Checkpoint on Sept. 3, 2014.

What clemency challenge is about

Pannir's lawyers had argued that the death row man had only been notified of his scheduled date of execution one week in advance and that his petition for clemency to Singapore President Halimah Yaacob had been rejected.

Additionally, the letter from Halimah refusing clemency and the letter giving notice of his execution were both received by his family on May 17.

Pannir’s sister, Sangkari Pranthaman, said the family was stunned by the simultaneous receipt of these two letters, The Malay Mail reported.

Decision to proceed with execution

In his affidavit, Pannir stated that this meant the decision of the prison to proceed with the execution was made prior to the rejection of clemency by the president.

However, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) said Halimah had already given directions on May 7 to notify Pannir and his family that the death penalty would stand, CNA further reported.

Letters had already been sent from the the Istana to Singapore Prison Services on May 14 for forwarding to Pannir and his family, Benny Lee, the principal private secretary to the president stated.

This meant that both parties were notified by letters from the Istana, which were dated May 17, along with another letter of the same date from the Singapore Prison Service, that served notice for the execution date.

However, Sundraresh said that Deputy Public Prosecutor Francis Ng had acknowledged that this would not have given Pannir much time to seek advice on options he had to appeal the execution of the sentence.

Only gained a representative lawyer on the same day of his hearing

The court also took into account the fact that the lawyer representing Pannir, Too Xing Ji, had only stepped forward on the same day of the hearing, after he heard about the case the night before, on May 22.

Too, together with his colleague, Lee Ji En, had only managed to contact Pannir's Malaysian lawyers, N Surendran and Latheefa Koya, on the day of the hearing.

Sundraresh remarked on this development: "To be fair to him (Too), we could not expect him to be in a position mount a full developed argument."

Sundraresh also noted that there was nothing to suggest that Pannir had acted with undue delay or abused the process of court.

In making the decision to stay Pannir's execution with the other two judges, Sundraresh stated that Pannir should “have a reasonable opportunity to take advice on whether he can mount a successful challenge”.

Sundraresh then laid out the subsequent timeline for the process.

He said: "The applicant has two weeks to file his intended application together with any supporting evidence. Prosecution have a period of two weeks to respond."

"Both parties have to file skeleton submission within one week of the prosecution's response and the matters to refix for hearing before us in short notice."

Too and Lee have since stated that they will be helping Pannir with his case.

Family overjoyed

Pannir's family are extremely relieved, CNA reported.

In particular, Pannir's father was overjoyed with the decision and said he was praying hard that it would not be short-lived, Bernama higlighted.

MHA responds to reports that certificate of assistance was unreasonably denied

Separately, MHA also responded to reports in Malaysian media that Pannir had been "unreasonably denied the certificate of assistance" that would have allowed the court to sentence him to life imprisonment instead.

According to The Malay Mail, this was the claim that had been made by one of Pannir's Malaysian lawyers, Surendran.

In response, MHA stated:

"MHA would like to clarify that the decision is taken by the Public Prosecutor in his sole discretion, based on whether the offender had provided the authorities substantive assistance that leads to the disruption of drug trafficking activities in Singapore. The Public Prosecutor determined that he had not."

Top photo from M Ravi Facebook