Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What offences get the death penalty?

Although the death penalty is available as a punishment for a range of offences in Singapore (like waging war against the government), in reality it is actively used for three main offences: drug trafficking, murder, firearms offences.

The vast majority of people on death row have been convicted of drug offences.

How many people are there on death row?

The government does not publish the number of people on death row. However, based on TJC’s research, we believe there to be over 50 people on death row. As far as we know, there are two women on death row, and the rest are men. Three of the people on death row were convicted of murder; the rest received death sentences for drug offences.

Conditions on death row

There is no official transparency into the conditions on death row. What TJC knows has been gathered from accounts of family members of people on death row.

According to these families, prisoners live in solitary cells, where they remain for about 23 hours a day. They are allowed one hour per day (on weekdays and non-public holidays) of yard time. During this time, they are still kept apart, separated by a mesh divider so they can’t see each other. Although they can communicate with one another by shouting from one cell to another, or speaking through the mesh, this is not always easy. Death row prisoners live in conditions of extreme social isolation, especially during the pandemic when parts of the prison went on lockdown, and when the borders were closed, so that families from outside Singapore could not come to visit.

Unlike others in Changi Prison, death row prisoners are not allowed e-letters. They were allowed 30 minutes of phone privileges each week during the pandemic, but now that the borders are open again the prison has put a stop to phone calls.

What happens when an execution has been scheduled?

Prisoners and family members are only given seven days’ notice before a death sentence is carried out. (During the pandemic, Nagaenthran K Dharmalingam’s family were given 14 days’ notice, likely in consideration of the travel restrictions they had to navigate.)

In this final week, family members are allowed daily visits in the morning and afternoon. They are also given the opportunity to buy up to four outfits for the prisoner to wear in a photoshoot that will be conducted a few days before the execution. The photographs are given to the family either just before the execution, or when they claim and identify the body afterwards.

Who is most affected?

Like in other jurisdictions that have capital punishment, the death penalty in Singapore disproportionately affects the most marginalised and disadvantaged in society. The vast majority of death row prisoners in Singapore are ethnic minorities, coming from difficult socio-economic backgrounds. Many have experienced poverty, abuse or other circumstances that have put them in situations where they were more vulnerable than most to drug use or the drug trade. They are low-level users, sellers, or smugglers, and are not the big kingpins who truly profit handsomely from the illicit drug trade.

What about deterrence?

There is no evidence that the death penalty works better than any other punishment in deterring crime. A study that compared the homicide rates in Hong Kong (no death penalty) and Singapore (with death penalty) found that the rates of homicide were very similar, thus suggesting that the death penalty isn’t more effective than alternative approaches in deterring murder.

There is similarly no clear evidence that the death penalty deters drugs. As Harm Reduction International says: “Trying to prove or disprove the deterrent value of drug laws is extraordinarily difficult. Anecdotally, one could say harsh drug laws do not work. For example, Iran has some of the toughest drug laws in the world and a high prevalence of injection drug use. Sweden does not have the death penalty and it has comparatively low rates of problematic drug use.”

Although the Singapore government repeatedly insists that the death penalty deters drugs, there is no concrete evidence that proves this is so. A much-cited government survey found that a majority of respondents believe that the death penalty deters drugs, but this isn’t the same as the death penalty actually deterring the drug trade.

The Singapore government often points to the harm that drugs can cause in justifying the need for the death penalty and other punitive policies. Don’t you think these are harms that we should be concerned with and do something about?

We do not deny that drugs can carry risk and can cause harm, especially if people develop chronic and problematic dependence on them. However, we also need to consider that many of the harms—such as obtaining drugs from unregulated and untrustworthy ‘underground’ sources, and not having access to healthcare services—are caused by the punitive war on drugs that includes the use of the death penalty. If our focus was really on public health and ensuring the well-being of every person in our society, then we should be looking at harm reduction measures that keep people safe, rather than driving them to the margins and on to the black market.

Some of the most egregious problems with Singapore’s capital punishment regime

Possibility of wrongful convictions and executions

As with every jurisdiction that has capital punishment, the risk of wrongful convictions, which could then lead to wrongful executions, is real and present.

Just recently, Raj Kumar Aiyachami was acquitted from death row by the Court of Appeal. Raj had originally been charged with trafficking cannabis. By a stroke of luck he met another man, Mark, while in prison, and realised that there had been a case of mistaken delivery: Mark was the one who ordered cannabis, while Raj had ordered a chemically-laced tobacco called ‘Butterfly’. Mark testified in Raj’s defence; although the trial judge did not believe them, the Court of Appeal disagreed with the trial judge’s decision.

Imagine if Raj had not met Mark by chance — with the presumption clauses in the Misuse of Drugs Act in play (see below), he might still be on death row today and might have been executed!

He is not the only close shave: in 2020, the Court of Appeal reviewed its own decision and set aside Gobi Avedian’s death sentence. At that point, Gobi had actually exhausted his standard legal avenues and even his clemency appeal to the President had been rejected. Had it not been for a lawyer coming forward to file a late-stage application — a rare and difficult move — Gobi could have been executed.

The mandatory death penalty

The mandatory death penalty means that if someone is found guilty of the offence, the only sentence that the judge can pass is death. There is no mitigation, and judges do not have discretion to decide on the sentence based on the specifics of the case before them.

The mandatory death penalty applies to Section 300(a) of the Penal Code (intentional murder), and also to the Misuse of Drugs Act, if one is convicted of trafficking over a certain amount of controlled substance. The amount varies from drug to drug; for instance, the threshold for heroin is 15g, and for cannabis it is 500g.

Presumption clauses

The Misuse of Drugs Act contains presumption clauses that can make it difficult for people to prove their innocence. If someone is caught in possession of drugs, it is presumed that they knew the nature of the drug. If it is above a certain amount, it is presumed that they had it for the purpose of trafficking. If that amount hits the threshold for the death penalty, then the mandatory death penalty applies (unless very specific criteria is met). This essentially reverses the burden of proof, placing it on the accused instead of the prosecution.

The Certificate of Substantive Assistance system

Under the Misuse of Drugs Act, the court can only choose to sentence someone convicted of drug trafficking to a life sentence (with caning, if they are male and do not suffer from an ‘abnormality of mind’) instead of death if they meet narrow criteria:

(1) Their role has to be merely that of a courier, and

(2) They have received a Certificate of Substantive Assistance for substantively assisting investigators in disrupting the drug trade, or

(3) They suffer from an ‘abnormality of mind’ that affects their mental responsibility for the act.

The Certificate is issued by the prosecution, in consultation with the Central Narcotics Bureau. However, there is little transparency into how they decide whether or not to issue such a Certificate in each case. For example, in the case of Pannir Selvam Pranthaman, it was acknowledged that he had told the truth and cooperated with the police, but the police claimed that they had already known the information he’d shared with them, and therefore did not need to use the information he provided. Therefore, for circumstances that were completely out of his control, Pannir was not granted a Certificate, and remains on death row today.

In very blunt terms, the Certificate of Cooperation is a system where only people who are useful to law enforcement — in ways defined by law enforcement — are given the chance to live.

What about murderers? Shouldn’t we have the death penalty for killers?

When we hear of a heinous, violent crime, we often get angry and feel a desire for vengeance or retribution. However, we should not mistake this desire for justice, or imagine that revenge can repair harm. The death penalty not only does not rehabilitate the perpetrator, it also does nothing to provide compensation and care to victims who have suffered. Very often, though, the existence of the death penalty gives society the impression that “justice” has been done, and we all move on without actually paying attention to the needs of victims.

I’m not sure we should give in to “western influence” and pressure to abolish the death penalty…

There is nothing “western” about abolishing the death penalty. Judicial capital punishment as we know it today was introduced by the British colonial administration. The concept of a “was on drugs” has American origins, kicked off by President Richard Nixon and pushed by the US on to other countries around the world, through international institutions like the United Nations. Our current death penalty regime’s history is embedded in that of “western ways”. In many indigenous cultures across Asia, drugs have been used religiously, medicinally, and recreationally. If Singapore wants to turn away from “western influences”, abolishing the death penalty for drugs would be a good place to start.

Where can I find out more?

The Misuse of Drugs Act and its presumptions

Explainer: The “Abnormality of Mind” Exemption

Explainer: Guilty Pleas for Death Penalty

Explainer: What is the Certificate of Substantive Assistance?

Explainer: What do Singaporeans really think about the death penalty?

Explainer: Conviction based on confession of co-accused


Find out more:

  1. People on death row
  2. Executions
  3. Legal Challenges
  4. In The News
  5. Abolition Elsewhere