Federal Court Says It Cannot Rule On Prison Sentences By Pardons Board

---

 


The Federal Court does not have the jurisdiction to review, revisit, or change the Pardons Board’s decision to commute death sentences to life imprisonment (pemenjaraan bertempoh), the top court ruled today.
This is because the Federal Court is only empowered to review or revisit death sentences that it imposed or upheld, as well as death sentences upheld by the Pardons Board after a pardon petition is dismissed, said Court of Appeal judge Che Ruzima Ghazali, who read out the panel’s ruling this morning.
The panel, chaired by Chief Justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, was unanimously in favour of the prosecution, which filed a review application seeking to nullify another Federal Court decision made on Aug 27 last year.
The prosecution was referring to the verdict that overturned the Kedah, Penang, and Federal Territories Pardons Boards’ decision to allow three convicts, whose death sentences had been commuted to life imprisonment, to begin their jail term from their date of arrest.
The convicts were G Jiva, 56, Thai national Phrueksa Thaemchim, 42, and Zambian national Mailesi Phiri, 48, who were sentenced for drug trafficking offences. They were arrested in 2007, 2009, and 2021, respectively.
Jiva’s sentence was commuted in 2022, Phrueksa in 2017, and Mailesi in 2021, to 30-year jail terms.
‘Pardons Board’s prerogative cannot be challenged’
However, the prosecution contested the previous Federal Court decision, arguing that the panel had acted beyond its jurisdiction under the Revision of the Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) 2023 Act.
“(In the present case) the pardons granted to the respondents (the convicts) had changed their status from death-row prisoners to serving a term of imprisonment.
“In our view, it has caused them to no longer belong to any category of persons who have been sentenced to death.
“In this regard, we refer to several previous decisions of this court in relation to challenging the exercise (of the board’s) prerogative power, which we note that the court had taken the position that the prerogative power cannot be tried and reviewed judicially.
“Therefore, we are of the view that the action of the respondents submitting (this application last year) is akin to challenging a pardon decision, which is not permitted at all according to law,” he said.
The panel also ordered that the Apex Court’s decision dated Aug 27 be nullified as it found the court did not have jurisdiction to change the Pardons Board’s decision. 
Presiding together with Wan Ahmad Farid and Che Ruzima today was the Court of Appeal president Abu Bakar Jais, Chief Judge of Malaya Hasnah Hashim, and Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Azizah Nawawi.
Jiva, Phrueksa, and Mailesi were represented by lawyers K Simon Murali, N Sivananthan, and Abdul Rashid Ismail, respectively.
Deputy public prosecutors Saiful Edris Zainuddin, Tetralina Ahmed Fauzi, Solehah Noratikah Ismail, and Arif Aizuddin Masrom prosecuted.
ADS‘Respondents still have legal avenues’
Meanwhile, Wan Ahmad Farid, in supporting the panel’s decision, said that the door is not closed to the respondents even after today’s verdict.
Chief Justice Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh“In short, this is not the end of the road for the respondents (as they are) at liberty to file a new petition seeking leave from the respective Pardons Board to reconsider the date of jail time commencement, in line with the decision made by Penang’s Pardons Board in January 2025.
“The Pardons Board has the prerogative to revisit the commencement day of the imprisonment.
“From this perspective, the respondents were not said to be prejudiced as there are other avenues available to them if they wish to explore.” - Mkini

---