Pofma correction order issued to MalaysiaNow over article about drug courier’s treatment

granted a second stay of execution

to make another application against his capital sentence. This application was

.

“It is therefore false and misleading to suggest that the execution of Pannir on Oct 8, 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,” said MHA.

The second false statement concerned the Government’s decision not to issue a certificate of substantive assistance to Pannir.

Drug offenders deemed to have substantively assisted the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) in disrupting drug trafficking activities within or outside Singapore can be sentenced to life imprisonment and caning instead of the death penalty, if they are also found to have acted only as a courier.

At the time, Pannir

.

Pannir was not issued such a certificate as the Public Prosecutor determined that he had not provided substantive assistance to CNB, said MHA.

It added that Pannir’s legal challenge against the Public Prosecutor’s decision not to issue the certificate was also

.

“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,” said MHA.

The third and fourth falsehoods carried by the MalaysiaNow article involved statements that CNB had secretly facilitated an interview between the Malaysian Narcotics Crime Investigation Department (NCID) and Pannir, and that at the interview, a CNB officer wore a Malaysian police uniform and deliberately hid his identity as a CNB officer.

CNB facilitated an interview on Sept 27, 2025, between the NCID and Pannir, following a formal request by the former.

“CNB works closely with our overseas counterparts and will facilitate requests, where possible. The interview process was open and above board – Singapore Prison Service (SPS) had notified Pannir of the interview request. Pannir did not object to being interviewed, nor did he request his lawyer to be present. Pannir was also not prohibited from consulting his family or his counsel,” said MHA.

“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,” added the ministry.

The fifth false statement by MalaysiaNow alleged that SPS officers attempted to mislead Pannir’s family into signing a form stating that all of his belongings had been handed over to them.

Prior to his execution, Pannir requested to hand over his handwritten letters and poems to his family, said MHA. 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 then withheld by SPS as permitted under the law, said MHA.

After Pannir’s execution, SPS officers met his family to hand over his belongings and requested that they 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’ screening guidelines and that pages that did not meet the guidelines were withheld.

Eventually, Pannir’s family took over his belongings without signing the form.

“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,” said MHA. “The Government takes a serious view of the deliberate communication of falsehoods.”

In a statement on its Facebook page and signed off by its editor Abdar Rahman Koya, MalaysiaNow acknowledged the Pofma correction order but said it would not abide by it.

MalaysiaNow said the order “effectively… (says) that the Singapore government will manage MalaysiaNow’s content if it is not satisfied with what we publish”.

“It is baffling, even amusing, to think that the Singapore government could… expect the media in Malaysia to follow them,” it added.

“We do not take instructions from our own government; what makes them think we would take instructions from them?

“We reject this notice, and we will include this statement instead in all the links mentioned by the Pofma notice.”