Their convictions, which resulted in the death sentence being maintained, were affirmed by the apex court at least 10 years ago.
They applied for clemency, and their sentences were commuted to imprisonment. However, the pardons boards set the start of the jail terms from the date the pardons were granted, rather than the date of arrest.
Dissatisfied, the prisoners filed applications between December 2024 and January 2025, under the Revision of the Sentence of Death and Imprisonment for Natural Life (Temporary Jurisdiction of the Federal Court) Act 2023, to have their sentences backdated.
One of the applicants, Sulaiman Saidin, 52, had his death penalty for drug trafficking reduced to a 20-year jail term, starting from May 5, 2015, by the Perak pardons board.
In his affidavit, Sulaiman argued that his jail term should begin from July 20, 1996, the date of his arrest.
He said the pardon board’s decision meant that he would serve nearly 40 years in prison, whereas similar convicts who did not apply for pardons had their sentences backdated to their arrest dates.
Sulaiman further noted that those convicted of trafficking were sentenced to 30 years but often served 20 years, with one-third remission for good behaviour.
He argued that he would have been released from prison earlier under the same principle.
The applications were scheduled for hearing today before a three-member bench chaired by Justice Nordin Hassan, with Justices Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh and Ruzima Ghazali.
Proceedings were adjourned to allow lawyers to take further instructions in light of a Federal Court verdict delivered five months ago.
On Nov 12, 2025, a five-member Federal Court bench unanimously ruled that it had no jurisdiction to revise the orders of several pardons boards allowing three convicts to begin their sentences from the date of arrest.
Ruzima, who delivered the ruling, said the decision of a previous apex court bench to revise the sentence amounted to interfering with the clemency process.
“It amounts to challenging the decision of the pardons boards, which have a separate jurisdiction from the courts,” he said in allowing the prosecution’s review under Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules 1995 and setting aside the 2-1 majority ruling.
Ruzima said there was a series of judicial pronouncements to the effect that the decisions of pardons boards are non-justiciable and therefore cannot be entertained by the courts.
On Aug 27, 2024, the Federal Court ruled that the commuted 30-year jail terms handed down for drug trafficking on three inmates – G Jiva, 56, Thai national Phrueksa Thaemchim, 42, and Zambian national Mailesi Phiri, 48 – should run from the date of their arrest.
In doing so, the three-member bench led by Justice Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, who is now retired, overturned orders by the pardons boards of Kedah, Penang and the federal territories that the jail terms should run from the date the trio’s death sentences were commuted.
Lawyers Abdul Rashid Ismail, Khaizan Sharizad Ab Razak, and Jacqueline Albert represented the applicants, while deputy public prosecutors Yusaini Amer Abdul Karim, Ng Siew Wee, Solehah Noratikah Ismail, and P Sarulatha appeared for the prosecution.
The applicants, serving sentences across seven prisons nationwide, and their family members attended the proceedings.
Case management has been fixed for April 16 to determine a suitable hearing date.