Amnesty International has called on Singapore to suspend the scheduled execution of Pannir Selvam Pranthaman, a Malaysian national convicted of drug trafficking. Slated for October 8, 2025, the execution has drawn criticism due to alleged violations of international legal standards. Pranthaman has been on death row since being convicted in 2017 for importing 51.84 grams of heroin into Singapore. Amnesty International has opposed the mandatory death penalty for drug offenses, highlighting “multiple layers of unfairness” in this case as evidence of the Singaporean justice system’s non-compliance with international norms (JURIST).
The case has gained international media attention largely through efforts by Pranthaman’s sister, who has shared personal stories of her brother’s life and his artistic talents. She has also founded an NGO aiming to transform the Singaporean justice system towards focusing more on the root causes of drug trafficking rather than relying on harsh deterrence measures.
International legal experts, including those from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, argue that the current framework violates international legal standards, notably those stipulated under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Specifically, ICCPR Article 6 bans the mandatory application of the death penalty, reserving such measures for the “most serious crimes,” interpreted by the UN Human Rights Committee as acts involving intentional killing (BBC News).
In contrast to this international critique, Singapore continues its strict application of the death penalty. In 2025, the nation executed 11 people, 9 for drug-related offenses, establishing it as one of the few countries, including China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, where such executions have been confirmed in recent years. This is amidst a global trend where nearly three-quarters of countries have abolished the death penalty in practice or law (Amnesty International).
As the execution date looms, the international community watches closely, raising fundamental questions about human rights, fair trials, and the morality of capital punishment for non-lethal crimes.