C4 Centre Urges Early Release Of Draft Amendments To Separate Ag Public Prosecutor Roles

---

 
THE government’s decision to separate the roles of Attorney-General (AG) and Public Prosecutor (PP) must be developed with due regard for the inadequacies and failures in the present system to avoid repeating past mistakes, said an anti-corruption group.
The Centre to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Centre) said under the current framework the AG—who is appointed directly on the prime minister’s advice—holds the role of the public prosecutor ex officio.
“The AG is constitutionally granted almost absolute discretion to initiate, conduct and discontinue criminal proceedings which creates a significant risk of executive interference in the decision-making process for prosecutions,” it noted.
“Details on the separation itself are scarce at this point, with the government having acknowledged that constitutional amendments shall be made and relevant laws passed to ensure the parity of these two new ‘equal’ positions.
“However, we hope the government recognises that there are fundamental differences between them. Without prosecutorial powers, the AG shall continue its role as the government’s legal adviser and should therefore be aligned with the government of the day.”
The C4 Centre said ultimately this role is quasi-ministerial in nature and there is no issue if the position is filled according to the prime minister’s discretion.
It said however, a prosecuting authority must not serve the government of the day, but must serve the public interest, the Constitution and the demands of justice.
“These matters supersede political ebbs and flows. It is for this reason that the new PP office must not also be appointed according to the prime minister’s discretion,” it stressed.
“The most crucial element for this reform to be meaningful is the independence of the PP from the executive.
“The PP 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.”
The C4 Centre further listed three urgent considerations for the PP’s office, namely that the selection and appointment process must be open and transparent; that remuneration and other terms of office must be guaranteed under law and charged on the Consolidated Fund to avoid the risk of spurious budgetary cuts at the discretion of the government; and that the security of tenure must be protected with any removal subject to clearly defined criteria and a transparent hearing by an independent tribunal.
“Without these elements, this reform will do nothing to rebuild public trust in our ailing criminal justice system. There is no point in recreating the same inadequate frameworks after years of demands for change,” it stressed.
“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.
“Therefore, C4 Center calls on the government to ensure that the draft amendments for this reform are shared to the public as soon as possible, and that sufficient time is given to collect and incorporate feedback for impactful reform.” ‒  Focus Malaysia

---