My friend said:
Long ago, Singapore had a solicitor general who gave legal adviser to the government. The attorney general decided on the cases to be prosecuted according to the lawyer. Both acted independently of the government in power.
For some time now, we appointed one person to perform both roles of advising the government and acting as the public prosecutor.
We have seen in a neighboring country how the prime minister dismissed an attorney general who was acting to frame a charge of corruption against him (the prime minister) and replaced him with another person who then decided to drop the charge.
This is the danger of appointing a person who has a conflict of interest.
Dr. Mahathir has decided to separate the office of the attorney general who provide advice to the government and the office of the public prosector. He decided that these appointments should be made by Parliament, rather than the prime minister.
Will Singapore follow his standard of governance and separation of powers?
Long ago, Singapore had a solicitor general who gave legal adviser to the government. The attorney general decided on the cases to be prosecuted according to the lawyer. Both acted independently of the government in power.
For some time now, we appointed one person to perform both roles of advising the government and acting as the public prosecutor.
We have seen in a neighboring country how the prime minister dismissed an attorney general who was acting to frame a charge of corruption against him (the prime minister) and replaced him with another person who then decided to drop the charge.
This is the danger of appointing a person who has a conflict of interest.
Dr. Mahathir has decided to separate the office of the attorney general who provide advice to the government and the office of the public prosector. He decided that these appointments should be made by Parliament, rather than the prime minister.
Will Singapore follow his standard of governance and separation of powers?
No comments:
Post a Comment