On Oct. 10, 2024, Malaysia’s Federal Court reduced Azilah Hadri’s death sentence to 40 years in prison and 12 strokes of the cane, changing the punishment tied to the 2006 murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu.
The decision came from a three-member review panel chaired by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, which accepted Azilah’s application for commutation. The ruling did not reopen the question of guilt. It changed the penalty that had been attached to the conviction for years.
Azilah, now 48, had spent nine years on death row after the Federal Court upheld his conviction in 2015. He is one of two former Special Actions Unit policemen convicted in the case; the other, Sirul Azhar Umar, fled to Australia in 2014 while on bail.
The report also noted a striking detail from the courtroom. Shaariibuu’s father, Shaariibuu Setev, wrote a letter supporting Azilah’s bid for a lesser sentence. His message was read out by Azilah’s lawyer and invoked the sanctity of life, while asking that the appeal be conveyed to Sirul, the lawyers, the prosecutor’s office and the government.
The commutation reflects a wider change in Malaysian sentencing law. Under the old framework, murder carried a mandatory death penalty, leaving judges no room to choose another punishment. After a legal change last year, courts can now impose either death or a prison term of 30 to 40 years plus at least 12 strokes of the cane.
That shift matters because it explains why a sentence that once appeared fixed could now be reassessed by a review panel. The court’s decision shows how a law on the books can alter the outcome of a case even when the underlying conviction remains in place. It is not a retrial, but it is still a major change in legal consequence.
The court's move therefore sits at the junction of two timelines: the old murder conviction, when judges had no sentencing choice, and the newer framework that gives them discretion. In practical terms, that means the court could reduce punishment without undoing the original finding of guilt. That distinction is central to understanding why the punishment changed even though the conviction remained intact.
Azilah’s lawyer told reporters that his client was relieved. The report said Azilah had been on death row since the Federal Court upheld the conviction in 2015, which made the commutation a long-delayed turning point in a case that has remained part of the public record for years.
The sentence reduction also leaves a clear split in the story. The court acted on punishment, not on the facts of the original conviction. Sirul remains in Australia, having fled after being granted bail in 2014, while Azilah now faces a long custodial term instead of execution.
For Malaysia, the ruling is a practical example of the country’s move away from a fully mandatory death-penalty model in murder cases. For the people closest to the case, it is another chapter in a file that began with a killing in 2006, passed through a conviction and appeal process, and has now reached a different kind of finality in sentencing.
