Appointment of public prosecutors
Regrettably, the partisan considerations that motivate appointment of public prosecutors (PP) have become a systemic problem over the years. Inefficiency of the state appointed lawyers along with flawed investigation results in low rate of conviction. And a minister is on record in 2005 saying that inefficiency in prosecution results in the quashing of 70 percent cases. Today, we are not much better off.
Lawyers appointed by the government to conduct public cases must be selected on his or her proficiency and commitment and not on partisan considerations as has been, and is, the case. And when one takes into account that the remuneration of a PP is only Tk 500 per day, even less for an assistant PP, whether he or she takes up one case or 10, it is hardly any wonder that things have gotten to this dismal state.
It is not surprising that the chief justice himself has come out publicly on the issue. Poor knowledge of criminal laws and politicisation of the office of public prosecutor are severely hampering legal proceedings against alleged criminals and terrorists. Attempts were made in the past to make the public prosecution service non-partisan, but that initiative didn't go anywhere. The last caretaker government too attempted to promulgate an ordinance which would allow for a permanent attorney department and stipulated specific criteria that an individual would have to possess to be deemed qualified to hold such a position. That move also went nowhere. Unless quality of prosecutors is ensured the prosecution system is unlikely to see much improvement.
Comments