Separation of powers between Attorney General and Public Prosecutor strengthens integrity of justice system

The separation of powers between the Attorney General and the Public Prosecutor is not a new discourse, but it has once again come into focus within the framework of institutional reform.

The statement by Rasuah Busters chief executive officer Nurhayati Nordin, that such a separation could eliminate the long-standing tradition of conflict of interest reflects a clear demand from civil society to strengthen the integrity of the nation’s justice system.

Currently, the Attorney General and the Public Prosecutor function as a single entity, as provided under Article 145(2) and (3) of the Federal Constitution.

The combination of these roles often raise questions, particularly when cases involve political figures or government interests, which can create a perception of selective prosecution that undermines public confidence.

In a mature democratic system, perception is as important as reality. Confidence in justice depended not only on court decisions, but also on the independence of the institutions that bring cases before the courts.

Therefore, the argument for separating these powers becomes significant in distinguishing the government’s advisory role from prosecutorial authority, thereby minimising conflicts of interest.

The proposal to grant the Public Prosecutor autonomous powers through an Enabling Act that sets out a code of ethics and clear guidelines represents a balanced approach.

Absolute independence without checks and balances could also potentially lead to abuse of power.

The suggestion of a fixed seven-year term without extension reflects an effort to prevent dependence on the executive branch for contract renewals.

At the same time, a removal mechanism through a Prosecution Service Commission and the approval of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong reflects a structure that attempts to emulate the principle of security of tenure similar to that of judges.

Such a separation would require amendments to the Federal Constitution, which in turn would need a two-thirds majority support in Parliament.

In an often shifting and fragmented political landscape, achieving consensus is no easy task.

There may also be concerns among certain parties that prosecutorial autonomy could open the door to prosecutions from different perspectives.

Hence, comprehensive discussions and engagements with the legal fraternity, academics, and civil society are crucial to ensure that the reform is not viewed as a partisan agenda, but rather as a long-term investment in national stability.

The separation of powers between the Attorney General and the Public Prosecutor is a bold step toward strengthening the integrity of the justice system, with the potential to enhance public confidence and elevate Malaysia’s democratic standards to a more mature level.

Building trust requires consistency and the courage to uphold the principle of the rule of law without compromise.