Attorney general-public prosecutor separation requires accountability and safeguards

The Malaysian Bar has long advocated the separation of the offices of the attorney general and the public prosecutor as an important institutional reform to strengthen prosecutorial independence, uphold the rule of law and enhance public confidence in the administration of justice.

The office and functions of the public prosecutor cannot, and should never be, politicised.

While the Constitution (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 2026 represents a significant milestone in this reform journey and is long overdue, the Malaysian Bar is concerned that the proposed amendments may not achieve the true aspirations of strengthening prosecutorial independence.

The bill was first tabled in Parliament on 23 February, debated again on 3 March, and thereafter referred to a parliamentary special select committee for further consideration and stakeholder engagement.

The government has indicated that the bill will be retabled during the forthcoming parliamentary sitting in June.

As constitutional amendments of this significance will shape Malaysia’s legal and institutional landscape for decades to come, affecting the nation and the public, MPs must be afforded adequate time to comprehensively review, analyse and debate the bill before being called upon to vote.

The Malaysian Bar supports in principle the separation of the offices of the attorney general and the public prosecutor and has engaged constructively and provided comprehensive feedback on the reform proposals, and will scrutinise the final form of the bill and any accompanying legislation once they are publicly available.

The office of the public prosecutor exercises immense power affecting the liberty of individuals, the administration of justice, and public confidence in legal institutions.

Accordingly, the process by which the holder of that office is identified, assessed and appointed must be accompanied by meaningful safeguards and scrutiny. Transparency in the appointment process is essential for the credibility of the office and the legitimacy of its holder.

One of the core concerns of the Malaysian Bar relates to the constitutional basis upon which the public prosecutor is appointed.

Given the immense powers vested in the office of the public prosecutor, the Malaysian Bar takes the view that the appointment of the public prosecutor should be made pursuant to constitutional advice (within the meaning of Article 40(1A) of the Federal Constitution).

This would be consistent with the constitutional framework governing the appointment of other key officeholders connected with the administration of justice, including members of the judiciary and the attorney general.

The Bar therefore urges Parliament to make this position clear in the bill.

It is axiomatic that the separation of the offices of the attorney general and public prosecutor cannot be fully realised through constitutional amendments alone, but must be accompanied by enabling legislation, such as the office of the public prosecutor act – which is necessary to operationalise the new office, define its powers and responsibilities, establish clear appointment and accountability mechanisms and provide appropriate safeguards governing the exercise of prosecutorial functions, qualifications for office, code of conduct and ethical standards, reporting obligations, provisions limiting the public prosecutor’s discretionary powers to discontinue criminal proceedings, and institutional safeguards to preserve prosecutorial independence.

The Malaysian Bar cautions that any reform pursued hastily without containing proper and adequate safeguards risks producing an outcome that is worse than the status quo.

This historical and momentous exercise in reform should not be treated as a mere transactional exercise or be reduced to a political milestone, achieved in form but falling short of the mark in substance.

The Malaysian Bar calls upon our lawmakers to exercise their parliamentary functions responsibly to ensure that this reform exercise results in the highest quality of legislation, and not just end up as yet another political compromise.

The separation of the offices of the attorney general and public prosecutor presents a rare opportunity to strengthen public institutions, reinforce the administration of justice, and deepen public confidence in the rule of law.

This reform exercise must be meaningful and not merely perfunctory. – Bar

Anand Raj is the president of the Malaysian Bar.