By: Shah Johan
During a session in the Dewan Negara last week, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department for Law and Institutional Reform, Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman Said explained about the progress of law and institutional reforms that the unity government is currently undertaking. One of most important ones are the separation of the Attorney General (AG) and Public Prosecutor (PP) roles. She highlighted the complexity and the time required for this significant reform.
In Malaysia, the movement to separate the roles of the Attorney General (AG) and Public Prosecutor (PP) is a significant step towards enhancing judicial independence and upholding the rule of law. Spearheaded by Dato’ Sri Azalina herself, this reform is seen as crucial for a transparent and impartial legal system.
The challenge lies in the complexity of the process. Amending the constitution and ensuring political stability for implementation requires careful planning and widespread consensus. Dato’ Sri Azalina emphasizes the need for a comprehensive approach, stating, “The reform is described as requiring amendments to the constitution and political stability for its implementation.”
The key constitutional amendment needed is to Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution. This amendment would address the dual role of the AG, who currently serves as both the legal advisor to the Government and the Public Prosecutor. This dual role has been identified as a source of potential conflicts of interest, especially where government interests do not coincide with public interest.
In addition to this constitutional amendment, changes to the Criminal Procedure Code, specifically Section 376(1), and the definition of ‘Public Prosecutor’ under the Interpretations Act 1948 and 1967 are also necessary. These legal amendments will redefine the roles and establish clear boundaries between the AG and PP, which is essential for the fair exercise of justice in Malaysia.
Achieving these amendments requires a substantial parliamentary majority and consensus among various stakeholders, indicating the complexity and significance of this legal reform. The separation of these roles is expected to enhance transparency, accountability, and independence in Malaysia’s judicial system, drawing on successful models from countries like the United Kingdom, where the Attorney General does not interfere in the independent functioning of the Crown Prosecution Services.
The benefits of achieving this separation in Malaysia are manifold. It promises an environment where legal decisions are made based on law and justice, rather than political convenience. This separation would foster greater confidence in the legal system, both domestically and internationally.
Dato’ Sri Azalina’s efforts are commendable. Her foresight in recognizing the need for this reform and advocating for a phased, thoughtful approach underscores her commitment to sustainable change. “The separation process will be implemented in three phases, involving comparative studies, technical task force assessments, and stakeholder engagement,” she notes.
The lengthy timeline for the separation of the Attorney General (AG) and Public Prosecutor (PP) roles in Malaysia is not a drawback but a necessary process to ensure the reform’s success. This time allows for a comprehensive and meticulous approach, including in-depth comparative studies, technical assessments, and vital stakeholder engagement.
By taking a gradual and thorough approach, Malaysia can ensure that the changes made are well-informed, widely accepted, and resilient against future political shifts. This process underscores the commitment to a legal reform that is not only effective but also sustainable in the long term.
To implement the separation of the Attorney General (AG) and Public Prosecutor (PP) roles in Malaysia, specific constitutional and legislative amendments are required. These changes are critical to redefine the roles of the AG and PP, ensuring their independence and impartiality in the legal system.
The key constitutional amendment needed is to Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution. This amendment would address the dual role of the AG, who currently serves as both the legal advisor to the Government and the Public Prosecutor. This dual role has been identified as a source of potential conflicts of interest, especially where government interests do not coincide with public interest.
In addition to this constitutional amendment, changes to the Criminal Procedure Code, specifically Section 376(1), and the definition of ‘Public Prosecutor’ under the Interpretations Act 1948 and 1967 are also necessary. These legal amendments will redefine the roles and establish clear boundaries between the AG and PP, which is essential for the fair exercise of justice in Malaysia.
Achieving these amendments requires a substantial parliamentary majority and consensus among various stakeholders, indicating the complexity and significance of this legal reform. She highlighted that these substantial reforms necessitate amendments to the Federal Constitution, requiring the support of at least 148 members, or two-thirds of the lower house.
Azalina pointed out the challenges posed by the current political landscape, stating, “It’s a long process (and) as long as the government is entangled with threats of being toppled, then how do we achieve 148 (votes)? Let the government finish its term until the 16th general election so that these reforms could take place in the next four years.”
This statement underscores the interplay between legal reform and political stability, and the need for a conducive political environment to implement such crucial changes.
In conclusion, the separation of AG and PP roles in Malaysia, as advocated by Dato’ Sri Azalina, represents a forward-thinking move towards a more just and equitable society. It is a long and challenging journey, but the rewards of a fair and independent legal system are invaluable for the nation’s future.
-Legal Commentator
