C4 Centre urged that plans for the separation of powers between the attorney general (AG) and the public prosecutor include a rule requiring the latter not to be appointed by the prime minister.
Warning that the reform measure will be meaningless without moves to ensure independence from the executive, the civil society organisation pointed out that without prosecutorial powers, the AG will be able to continue its “quasi-ministerial” role as the government’s legal adviser.
As such, it said there is “no issue” if the position is filled according to the prime minister’s discretion to allow for an AG’s office aligned with the government of the day.
“However, a prosecuting authority must not serve the government of the day. It must serve the public interest, the constitution, and the demands of justice. These matters supersede political ebbs and flows,” C4 Center said in a statement today.
“It is for this reason that the new public prosecutor’s office must not also be appointed according to the prime minister’s discretion.
“The public prosecutor must be immune from the risk of executive interference in the execution of their duties to ensure all prosecutions are conducted in the interest of justice,” it added.
On Wednesday, Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil announced that the cabinet has agreed to fully separate the powers of the AG and public prosecutor through amendments to the Federal Constitution.
The development came after a two-year study and a cabinet review of several models to divide the roles.
C4 Center reiterated calls for the selection and appointment process of the public prosecutor to be open and transparent.
It asserted that there should be “statutorily defined criteria” for such appointments, open calls for applications, and a transparent process of consideration through a parliamentary select committee.
Tenure security
It also said that remuneration and other terms of the public prosecutor’s office must be guaranteed under law and charged on a consolidated fund - similar to judges under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution - to avoid the risk of “spurious budgetary cuts at the discretion of the government”.
Security of tenure, it added, must be protected, with any removal subject to clearly defined criteria and a transparent hearing by an independent tribunal where the public prosecutor is given a right to defend themselves.
C4 Center cautioned that without such elements, the reform measure will do nothing to rebuild public trust in the nation’s “ailing” criminal justice system.
“There is no point in recreating the same inadequate frameworks after years of demands for change.
“In order to ensure this reform proposal is developed in a progressive and holistic manner, the government must also ensure meaningful consultations are conducted with all relevant stakeholders, including academics and civil society,” it said.
Yesterday, DAP Women’s legal bureau head Sangeet Kaur Deo also proposed to have the public prosecutor appointed through a transparent process, ideally involving Parliament, or an independent body, rather than leaving the matter to the discretion of a "select few."
She added that beyond structures and laws, the deeper challenge lies in political culture as even the most carefully drafted provisions will falter if informal practices of influence or interference are allowed to persist. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.