Need for a separate office of Public Prosecutor
As long as the Attorney-General holds the power to decide on prosecutions, the problems faced by Apandi today will continue to be faced by all future Attorneys-General, regardless of how honest they are.
Wan Saiful Wan Jan is chief executive of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs
(FMT) – Lately the Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali has been in the news quite a lot. Just a few days ago he was quoted in Sin Chew Daily saying that he is unhappy about leakages of government secrets.
He was even quoted to have said “in some countries leaking official secrets is a serious offence such as China where it carries the death sentence.”
It is understandable that official secrets must be protected. But targeting just those who leak sensitive information is the wrong move. Let me remind Apandi that China executes not just those who leak official secrets. The list includes those found guilty of financial fraud and illegal fund raising too.
However to be fair, I think Apandi’s challenges are much bigger. He has to climb a very steep mountain to gain public trust because the trust deficit against him is enormous.
It does not matter if he is the most honest and the most professional person on earth. Public perception is not with him. Many are alleging that he was appointed solely to close the investigations surrounding the Prime Minister.
It does not matter if this allegation is slander. The criticisms against Apandi are getting louder by the day and no matter what he does some people will continue to not trust him.
To me the root cause of this situation is the potential conflict of interest that exists in the office of the Attorney-General. It is not about Apandi personally. I am pretty sure that whoever is appointed as the Attorney-General will suffer the same fate as Apandi today because of that conflict.
The conflict of interest is caused by the fusion of two roles into one office. The Attorney-General provides legal advice to the government and at the same time decides whether or not to prosecute a case. The conflict would occur if the person being investigated is in government. If the Attorney-General is advising that person in government, many people will doubt his independence when deciding whether or not to prosecute that same person.
This situation is bad for both the Attorney-General and the person in question. The Attorney-General will face criticism even if he acts professionally and honestly, while the person in question will continue to be doubted even if there is truly no case against him.
