Episode 34: Rethinking Justice : The Abolition of the Mandatory Death Penalty

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Malaysia's stance on the mandatory death penalty has evolved significantly over the years. Historically, the country maintained a stringent approach, with capital punishment being mandatory for serious crimes such as drug trafficking, murder, and terrorism. This stance was rooted in the belief that harsh penalties would deter crime and ensure justice. However, this approach has faced criticism for its lack of judicial discretion and potential for miscarriages of justice.[1]

In the past, Malaysia's legal framework mandated the death penalty for various offences, leaving little room for judges to consider mitigating factors. This approach was supported by the notion of deterrence and retribution. However, recent years have seen a shift in this stance. In 2018, the Malaysian government imposed a moratorium on executions, signalling a move towards potential reform.[2] This shift was further solidified in 2022 when the government announced its intention to abolish the mandatory death penalty for certain offences, reinstating judicial discretion. The Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 marks a significant milestone in Malaysia's legal landscape.[3] This Act replaces the mandatory death penalty with judicial discretion, allowing judges to consider the unique circumstances of each case.[4]

Globally, there has been a significant trend towards the abolition of the death penalty. More than two-thirds of the world’s countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Nations such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and South Africa have eliminated capital punishment, citing human rights concerns and the risk of wrongful convictions.[5] This global trend reflects a growing recognition of the potential for irreversible miscarriages of justice and the questionable deterrent effect of the death penalty. 

Hence, this article will examine the historical context of the death penalty and its abolishment in the world and in Malaysia, the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, and the opinions of supporters and opponents.

2.0 THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE DEATH PENALTY

The death penalty has an extensive history. The first laws establishing the death penalty date back to the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C. Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.'s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.'s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement.[6]

The death penalty has long been a subject of intense moral and philosophical debate. Retributivism holds that punishment should be proportionate to the crime committed. From this perspective, individuals who commit heinous crimes, such as murder, deserve to be punished by death. The focus is on past actions and the belief that justice is served when offenders receive their "just deserts." ‘Utilitarianism’ or ‘Consequentialism’ considers the broader consequences of the death penalty. Proponents argue that it can serve as a deterrent, preventing others from committing similar crimes out of fear of receiving the same punishment. Additionally, they contend that it incapacitates the offender, ensuring they cannot commit further crimes.

2.1 Reasons to Abolish the Death Penalty

By 2004, 118 countries had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice. An average of three countries abolish the death penalty every year. The worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty is reflected in the African region, where 24 members of the African Union had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice, by 1 October 2004. Malaysia similarly abolished the mandatory death penalty for most serious crimes on July 4, 2023.[7] However, what are the reasons that prompted this abolition?

The primary reason could be that the death penalty violates the right to life. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) recognizes each person’s right to life.[8] Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) states that “human beings are inviolable.[9] Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the physical and moral integrity of his person.” This perspective is further supported by various international and regional treaties advocating for the abolition of the death penalty, notably the second optional protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1989.[10]

In Malaysia, a similar notion is discussed. The decision to abolish the mandatory death penalty is grounded in aligning with Article 5 of the Federal Constitution.[11] This article ensures that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except in accordance with the law. Through this change, Malaysia reaffirms its commitment to upholding the right to life and ensuring that justice is served, with due consideration for the circumstances of each case.

Another crucial argument is that the death penalty is inherently cruel. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) explicitly states, “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.”[12] All forms of execution are inhumane, as no government can ensure a dignified and painless death for condemned prisoners, who also endure psychological anguish between sentencing and execution.[13] This underscores the inhumanity of the death penalty and strengthens the argument for its abolition.

Another critical point is that the death penalty fails to account for the fallibility of human institutions. The risk of executing innocent people remains inextricably linked to the use of the death penalty. Since 1973, 116 individuals in the United States who were sentenced to death have been released after their innocence was proven. Some narrowly escaped execution after spending years on death row. These repeated judicial errors often stem from irregularities committed by prosecutors or police officers, reliance on doubtful evidence, false or coerced confessions, and the incompetence of defense lawyers. Tragically, some prisoners have been executed even when serious doubts about their guilt existed.[14]

Furthermore, the death penalty denies individuals the chance to reform. Some argue that those sentenced to death are beyond redemption and may re-offend. However, there are many cases where offenders have reintegrated into society and not re-offended. Amnesty International supports reviewing conditional release procedures and psychological monitoring of prisoners to prevent re-offending rather than increasing executions. The death penalty also removes any possibility for the condemned to repent.[15]

3.0 LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF ABOLITION OF MANDATORY DEATH IN MALAYSIA

There are two primary legal frameworks pertaining to the abolition of the mandatory death penalty in our legislation. These include the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023[16] and Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of Federal Court) Act 2023.[17]

3.1 Timeline of Legislative Reforms in the Abolition of the Mandatory Death Penalty

Malaysia's effort to abolish the mandatory death penalty began in July 2018, when the government imposed a nationwide moratorium on executions.[18] While courts continued to impose death sentences, no executions had been carried out since the moratorium took effect. The last known execution took place in May 2017, involving Yong Kar Mun, who was convicted of firing a gun during a robbery.[19] 

On 27 March 2023, the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) presented the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Bill 2023[20] and the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of Federal Court) Bill 2023[21] for the first reading in the Dewan Rakyat.[22] The Abolition of the Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023[23] was later passed and came into force on 4th July 2023. Later, the Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023[24] came into force on 12th September 2023.[25]

3.2 Key Provision and Mechanism of Legal Frameworks

To understand the effects of these Acts on the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia, it is essential to examine their mechanisms and the offences they address.

The Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 introduces four key elements.[26]  Firstly, it grants judges discretion to impose either the death penalty or life imprisonment along with a maximum of 12 strokes of whipping.[27] Secondly, the Act also provides an alternative sentence for life imprisonment with an imprisonment between 30 to 40 years.[28] Thirdly, it amends seven related Acts including the Penal Code,[29] Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971,[30] Arms Act 1960,[31] Kidnapping Act 1961,[32] Dangerous Drugs Act 1952,[33] Strategic Trade Act 2010,[34] and Criminal Procedure Code,[35] to reflect the relevant offence changes in options for sentencing. Lastly, this Act includes a transitional measure, where it applies to individuals currently on trial, as well as those already convicted that are currently undergoing sentence reviews by higher courts. This transitional provision affects 476 prisoners who have pending appeals at the Court of Appeal or Federal Court and 842 prisoners who have exhausted all legal remedies.[36]

While the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023[37] applies to cases after 4 July 2023, the Revision of the Death Sentence and Life Imprisonment Act 2023[38] serves as a complementary Act and provides a temporary mechanism for reviewing sentences imposed before the former act came into effect. It grants the Federal Court a temporary revisionary jurisdiction to review death sentences[39] and life imprisonment sentences[40]. The application for review of both death sentences[41] and life imprisonment[42] should be made within 90 days from the effective date, which is on 12 September 2023. It is worth noting that the court would not review the original conviction, but merely review the death and life imprisonment sentences.

3.3 Court Decisions and Impacts

The impact of the abolition of the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia has been evident ever since the Revision of Sentence of Death and Life Imprisonment Review (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023[43] came into force. As of 14th October 2024, the Federal Court had commuted the sentences of 866 individuals.[44] This included 52 prisoners at the appeal stage whose death sentences were replaced with imprisonment, and 814 others who had their death sentences reduced to imprisonment through hearings.[45]

The first successful case to be reviewed under this Act is the case of Teh Hock Leong v Public Prosecutor.[46] Teh was convicted for trafficking 580.3 grams of methamphetamine. He was found guilty by the High Court and was sentenced to death. He appealed to both the Court of Appeal and Federal Court, but was dismissed. He then applied for a sentence review under this Act. The Federal Court commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment of 30 years, further reducing it to 20 years for good behavior.[47]

However, not all applications have been successful. One of the first cases that was rejected by the court was the case of Junaidi bin Bambang v Public Prosecutor.[48] Junaidi was convicted of murdering his three daughters in 2002. The High Court found him guilty and sentenced him to death. Both the conviction and death sentence were subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. Junaidi then filed a sentence review under this Act, where he sought to have his sentence commuted to life imprisonment of 35 years.[49] However, the Federal Court rejected his application, ruling that the circumstances did not justify the exercise of discretion to substitute the death sentence.[50] 

4.0 SUPPORTERS’ AND OPPONENTS’ OPINIONS

The abolition of the mandatory death penalty by the Parliament received mixed reactions from Malaysians. In a survey conducted by a major newspaper company in Malaysia, approximately 82% of the respondents opposed the abolition while 18% supported it.[51] Not to mention, this topic has seen a lengthy debate from the supporters and opponents of the mandatory death penalty, long before the Act[52] was being discussed in the first place.[53]

4.1 Supporters’ View

Supporters, mostly criminal defense lawyers[54] and human rights activists,[55] widely support Parliament’s move to abolish the mandatory death penalty. They view it as a more humane approach to punishing criminals. In cases like drug trafficking or murder, offenders have no chance to fight for their lives, as death is the only punishment.[56] Abolishing the mandatory death penalty gives these offenders a chance to live and rehabilitate. Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, Minister of the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform), stated that this reform brings justice and balance for all parties involved.[57] The change values every life while ensuring fairness for victims, drug-related cases, and their families.[58]

Amnesty International described the decision as a ‘welcome step’ in the right direction, urging the government to work towards full abolition of the death penalty.[59] The European Union has also expressed their full support for the abolition and will also work for the same in the few countries that are still applying it.[60] The Malaysian Bar has also commended the announcement of abolishing the mandatory death penalty as the nature of punishment does not assure a safe and secure society but only diminishes people’s collective humanity.[61] However, the government was also urged to review the fate of more than 1300 current death row inmates as it is "an inhumane way" of treating the death row inmates by letting them linger in prison, uncertain of their fate.[62]

Furthermore, this notion is also supported by many because the abolitionists believe that the death penalty failed in reducing criminal cases that it’s supposed to reduce, for instance, drug trafficking offences.[63] For example, the police discovered drugs worth nearly RM1 billion between January and November 2022, even though the mandatory death penalty was not abolished at that time.[64] This indicates that the existence of the mandatory death penalty did not serve as an effective deterrent to such crimes. By shifting focus toward rehabilitation and preventive measures, abolitionists agreed that the justice system can better address the underlying problems while upholding the value of human life.

4.2 Opponent's Reception

Most opponents of the abolishment of mandatory death penalty come from a background of those who either have directly been a victim or have a relation with the victim of such offences.[65] For instance, the father of Zulfarhan, the infamous victim of the tragic UPNM bullying case, does not agree with abolishing the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia.[66] According to him, such action does not bring justice to the family of the victim if the punishment given ultimately does not carry the same weight as what they have done.[67] Opponents held the view that the death penalty should be mandatory in certain cases as the abolition provides the offenders an avenue to escape the consequences of their action.

Furthermore, during the parliamentary debate, the opposition presented a memorandum signed by victims’ families and NGOs against the Act.[68] They argued that abolishing the mandatory death penalty would lessen the fear of committing heinous crimes.[69] An online survey by Protect Malaysia gathered 96,700 signatures supporting the retention of the death penalty.[70] Opponents to the abolishment claimed that public safety should come first, not the interests of 0.00039% of death row inmates in Malaysia.[71] They believe that keeping the mandatory death penalty is crucial to deter serious offences and maintain justice.

5.0 CONCLUSION

Malaysia has gradually embraced a more liberal approach toward criminal reform and deterrence. At the heart of this shift is the recognition that outright mandatory execution denies an individual the opportunity for repentance, growth, and redemption.

The decision to abolish the mandatory death penalty stands as a significant milestone. By moving beyond the simplistic notion of "hanging and being done with it," the government signals its belief in a more constructive and humane approach to justice—one that seeks to emphasize rehabilitation and reintegration over extermination.

While both supporters and opponents of the mandatory death penalty present compelling arguments, one undeniable truth prevails: every human life carries immense value. The decision to end it should never be made lightly. The law should reflect this, as cases are never always cut and dry. The abolishment of the mandatory death penalty reflects Malaysia’s effort in taking a step towards a justice system that balances accountability with the belief in human potential for change. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Human Rights Watch. (2023, April 11). Malaysia Repeals Mandatory Death Penalty. Retrieved from <https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/04/11/malaysia-repeals-mandatory-death-penalty>. Site accessed on 30 December 2024.

[2] The Death Penalty Project. (2018, February). The Death Penalty in Malaysia: Public Opinion on the Mandatory Death Penalty for Drug Trafficking, Murder, and Firearms Offences. Retrieved from <https://www.deathpenaltyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Malaysia-report.pdf>. Site accessed on 30 December 2024. 

[3] The Abolition of the Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 (Act 846)(Malaysia).

[4]Amnesty International Malaysia. (n.d.). Abolish the Death Penalty. Retrieved from <https://www.amnesty.my/abolish-death-penalty/>. Site accessed on 30 December 2024.

[5]Death Penalty Information Centre (n.d.). International. Retrieved from <https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international>. Site accessed on 30 December 2024.

[6] Death Penalty Information Center. n.d.. History Of The Death Penalty: Early History of the Death Penalty, Site accessed<https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/history-of-the-death-penalty/early-history-of-the-death-penalty>. Last accessed on 4 January 2025.

[7] Amnesty International (2004, Oct 1), 10 reasons to abolish the death penalty.

[8] United Nations, (1948). 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights,' Article 3.

[9] African Union. (1981). African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, Article 4.

[10] United Nations, General Assembly Resolution 44/128, Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted 15 December 1989.

[11] Federal Constitution (Malaysia) Art 5; Karen Cheah Yee Lynn (2022, June 11), Press Release .Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty a Step Towards the Right Direction, But Abolish Capital Punishment Entirely. Malaysian Bar. <https://www.malaysianbar.org.my/article/about-us/president-s-corner/pressstatements/press-release-abolition-of-mandatory-death-penalty-a-step-towards-the-right-direction-but-abolish-capital-punishment-entirely>. Last accessed on 2 February 2025.

[12] United Nations, (1948). 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights,' Article 7.

[13] Amnesty International (2004, Oct 1), 10 reasons to abolish the death penalty.

[14] See Footnote 13.

[15] See Footnote 13.

[16] See Footnote 3.

[17] Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 (Act 847)(Malaysia).

[18] Amnesty Malaysia (n.d.). Abolish Death Penalty. Amnesty Malaysia. Retrieved from May 24 <https://www.amnesty.my/abolish-death-penalty/ >. Site accessed on 4 January 2025.

[19] Amnesty Malaysia, (May 24, 2017). Further information: Malaysia: Two men hanged in secretive executions: Yong Kar Mun. Amnesty Malaysia. Retrieved from <https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa28/6343/2017/en/>. Site accessed on 10 January 2025.

[20] Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Bill 2023 (Malaysia).

[21] See Footnote 17.

[22] Carvalho, M.,Rahimy Rahim & Tarrence Tan,(March 27, 2023). Bills tabled to abolish mandatory death sentence, criminalise live-streaming sex involving children. The Star. Retrieved from <https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2023/03/27/bills-tabled-to-abolish-death-sentence-criminalise-live-streaming-sex-involving-children>. Site accessed on 10 January 2025.

[23] See Footnote 3.

[24] See Footnote 17.

[25] Nicholas Yong, (April 3, 2023). Malaysia ends mandatory death penalty for serious crimes. BBC News Singapore. Retrieved from < https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-65160091>. Site accessed on 9 January 2025. 

[26] See Footnote 3.

[27] Muhammad Yusry, (Jul 3, 2023).Abolishment of mandatory death penalty gazetted, to come into force tomorrow.  Retrived from <https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2023/07/03/abolishment-of-mandatory-death-penalty-gazetted-to-come-into-force-tomorrow/77669#google_vignette>. Site accessed on 9 January 2025. 

[28] Muhammad Yusry, (Jul 3, 2023).Abolishment of mandatory death penalty gazetted, to come into force tomorrow. malaymail  Retrived from <https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2023/07/03/abolishment-of-mandatory-death-penalty-gazetted-to-come-into-force-tomorrow/77669#google_vignette>. Site accessed on 9 January 2025. 

[29] Penal Code (Act 574)(Malaysia).

[30] Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971 (Act 37)(Malaysia).

[31] Arms Act 1960 (Act 206) (Malaysia).

[32] Kidnapping Act 196 (Act 365)(Malaysia).

[33] Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (Act 234) (Malaysia).

[34] Strategic Trade Act 2010 (Act 708) (Malaysia).

[35] Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593) (Malaysia).

[36] Malaysia, Parliamentary Debates, Representative, Fifteenth Parliament, Second Session, 3 April 2023, pp 105. 

[37] See Footnote 3.

[38] See Footnote 17.

[39] Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 (Act 847)(Malaysia), s2.

[40] Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 (Act 847)(Malaysia), s4.

[41] Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 (Act 847)(Malaysia), s3.

[42] Revision of Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023 (Act 847)(Malaysia), s5.

[43] See Footnote 17.

[44] Muhammad Yusry, (Nov 6, 2024). Over 800 death row sentences were commuted to imprisonment under the new Act, says Azalina. Malay Mail. Retrived from <https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2024/11/06/over-800-death-row-sentences-commuted-to-imprisonment-under-new-act-says-azalina/156042 >. Site accessed on 9 January 2025.

[45] See Footnote 44.

[46] Teh Hock Leong v Public Prosecutor [2010] 1 MLJ 741.

[47] MahWengKwai & Associates. (May 8, 2024). MahWengKwai & Associates. Retrived from <https://mahwengkwai.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/2024-05-08-Applying-to-Commute-Death-and-Life-Sentences-under-Malaysias-2023-Criminal-Law-Reforms.pdf>. Site access on 10 January 2025.

[48] Junaidi bin Bambang v Public Prosecutor [2011] 3 MLJ 141.

[49] See Footnote 47.

[50] Ho Kit Yen. (Jan 17, 2024). Apex court upholds man’s death sentence for killing 3 daughters. Free Malaysia Today. Retrived from <https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2024/01/17/apex-court-upholds-mans-death-sentence’-for-killing-3-daughters/ >. Site accessed on 9 January 2025. 

[51] Siti Hajar Mohd Afendi, Siti Aishah Borhanuddin, & Muhammad Zaki Ramle. (2023). Pemurnian Terhadap Polemik Pemansuhan Hukuman Mati Mandatori di Malaysia. In Norazala Abdul Wahab, Fakhri Sungit, Nawal Sholehuddin, Mohd Rofaizal Ibhraim (Ed.). International Conference on Syariah & Law 2023, Selangor (pp 44-59). Selangor, Malaysia: Universiti Islam Selangor.

[52] See Footnote 3.

[53] Rueben Ananthan Santhana Dass. (2019). Death Penalty in Malaysia: To Abolish or Not to Abolish?. Malayan Law Journal Articles, 2. 5. Retrieved at <https://advance.lexis.com/api/permalink/fef659f1-d0aa-40db-8fc5-a8ee4ff8f93f/?context=1522468>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[54] Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, & Guok Ngek Seong. (2023). Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Bill 2023. Malayan Law Journal Articles,3,1. Retrieved at <https://advance.lexis.com/api/permalink/55b67682-5dd3-4bdb-a861-6856d715f1f3/?context=1522468>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[55] Ramizah Wan Muhammad. (2022, Jun 22). Hukuman mati patut kekal dalam sistem undang-undang jenayah. Berita Harian. Retrieved at <https://www.bharian.com.my/rencana/minda-pembaca/2022/06/968536/hukuman-mati-patut-kekal-dalam-sistem-undang-undang-jenayah>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[56] See Footnote 51.

[57] Muhammad Fathi Yusof. (2023, Apr 5). Reformasi hukuman mati demi keadilan untuk semua pihak. Berita Harian. Retrieved at <https://www.bharian.com.my/kolumnis/2023/04/1086190/reformasi-hukuman-mati-demi-keadilan-untuk-semua-pihak>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[58] See Footnote 57.

[59] Amnesty International. (2022, Jun 10). Malaysia:Move to abolish mandatory death penalty is ‘welcome step’ in right decision. Amnesty International. Retrieved at <https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/06/malaysia-mandatory-death-penalty-abolition/>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[60] Nabilla Massrali. (2023, Jun 21). Malaysia: Statement by the Spokesperson on new steps towards the abolition of the death penalty. European Union External Action. Retrieved at <https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/malaysia-statement-spokesperson-new-steps-towards-abolition-death-penalty_en>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[61] FMT Reporters. (2018, Oct 11). Right move to abolish death penalty, says Bar. Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved at <https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2018/10/11/right-move-to-abolish-death-penalty-says-bar/>. Site accessed on 8 January 2025.

[62] Anbalagan, V. (2023, Jan 9). Resolve fate of 1300 death row prisoners, govt urged. Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved at <https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2023/01/09/resolve-fate-of-1300-death-row-prisoners-govt-urged/>. Site accessed on 6 January 2025.

[63] Harian Metro. (2022, Jun 18). Tali gantung gagal lawan dadah. Harian Metro. Retrieved at <https://www.hmetro.com.my/mutakhir/2022/06/853055/tali-gantung-gagal-lawan-dadah>. Site accessed on 5 January 2025.

[64] See Footnote 63.

[65] See Footnote 51.

[66] Mohamed Farid Noh. (2022, Jun 12). Bapa Zulfarhan tak setuju mansuh hukuman mati mandatori. Harian Metro. Retrieved at < https://www.hmetro.com.my/mutakhir/2022/06/851159/bapa-zulfarhan-tak-setuju-mansuh-hukuman-mati-mandatori>. Site accessed on 6 January 2025.

[67] See Footnote 66.

[68] Malaysia Kini. (2023, Apr 3). Anak dirogol, mati dikelar: Ibu mohon hukuman mati mandatori kekal. Malaysia Kini. Retrieved at <https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/660956>. Site accessed on 6 January 2025.

[69] See Footnote 68.

[70] Protect Malaysia. (2018, Nov 9). Keep Mandatory Death Penalty for Heinous Crimes in Malaysia. Change.org. Retrieved at <https://www.change.org/p/do-not-abolish-mandatory-death-penalty-for-premeditated-killings-causing-loss-of-lives-in-malaysia>. Site accessed on 6 January 2025.

[71] Amiruddin Yahya. (2019, Feb 22). Jangan mansuh hukuman mati. Malaysia Kini. Retrieved at <https://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/465132>. Site accessed on 6 January 2025.