The report in MALAYSIAKINI: Anti-Corruption Agency gets prosecution powers suggests that the Malaysian Bar's view in Review A-G's role 'to avoid conflict' has been taken into consideration by the federal government.
-
The Malaysian Bar, through its President, has stated that "The position of public prosecutor should be separate from the A-G to avoid any potential of conflict."
-
Ex-senior ACA officer Mohamad Ramli Abdul Manan had stated that since 1902, the power to institute and conduct criminal proceedings was given to the public prosecutor, deputy public prosecutors and other enforcement agencies while the A-G was conferred similar powers under Article 145 (3) of the Federal Constitution since 1957. He said a misinterpretation of Article 145(3) after a 1997 court ruling now prevented public statutory bodies like the Employees Provident Fund, Securities Commission, Road Transport Department and local authorities to bring criminal charges against violators without permission of the A-G. Ramli added that the A-G was only given discretionary powers under the constitution for him to interfere and see that justice was done.
-
Article 135(3) provides that, "The Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court or a court-martial".
-
Will this decision lend more credence to the report in MALAYSIAKINI: ACA quizzes IGP Musa, AG Gani? As always, we shall have to wait and see.
No comments:
Post a Comment