In wake of Aisyah’s freedom, lawyers say AG has wide discretionary powers

While the courts and lawyers only need to consider the application of the law, the attorney-general has other matters to consider as well.

According to senior lawyer Shahrudin Ali, an attorney-general's job was also to take into consideration the "public interest", which includes policy matters such as foreign relations.

This was his thoughts on why the attorney-general Tommy Thomas had ordered that charges against Indonesian national Siti Aisyah be dropped.

"The prosecution can take bilateral relations between Malaysia and Indonesia into consideration when deciding to drop charges against Aisyah.

"The strategic interest between the two countries has nothing to do with the law, but it is within the ambit of the attorney-general's powers," he told Malaysiakini when contacted.

Shaharudin explained that the attorney-general had the right to decide whether a person faced criminal charges, and whether the charges are dropped or amended.

Siti Aisyah was jointly charged together with Vietnamese national Doan Thi Huong and four others over the murder of Kim Jong Nam, the elder half-brother of North Korean president Kim Jong Un.

The incident took place in 2017 at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport 2 (KLIA2). The High Court had ordered both accused to enter their defence last August.

According to Thomas, charges against Siti Aisyah were dropped on request from the Indonesian government.

However, similar attempts to have charges against Doan dropped have been unsuccessful.

This has attracted criticisms from lawyer and lawmaker Ramkarpal Singh, who argued that since Siti Aisyah and Doan were charged together, they should be treated the same.

‘No other explanation’

According to criminal lawyer Rajsurian Pillai, the attorney-general was not obligated to explain its decision.

"The prosecutor can charge or withdraw a charge at any stage of a case," he said.

In the case of Siti Aisyah, Rajsurian opined that the attorney-general had made a political decision.

"There is no other explanation. The court has decided that there was a prima facie case against both accused," he said.

Another lawyer, Nur Hannan Ishak, echoed Ramkarpal. He said it was unjust to continue trying Doan for murder.

"(They) have entered their defence... That means elements (for a trial under) Section 302 of the Penal Code (murder) have been fulfilled," he said.

Nur Hannan believed that it was best left for the judge, rather than the attorney-general, to decide. - Mkini