Passing the buck puts justice on hold

The questions of the functioning of the DPP and his possibly being above the law need to be examined. The DPP being ‘the sole arbiter on the matter of prosecution’, is a half-truth, or only partly true. The fact is that the police, a private individual, Central Bank, or a Commission of Inquiry, in short almost anyone, can initiate prosecution of an individual or individuals for any crime or misdemeanor. The caveat is, however, that the DPP can step in and discontinue prosecution if warranted, or take-over prosecution as he deems fit. The courts may also rule on no-case submissions for prosecutions initiated. It is clear that the DPP would not dare to act corruptly against the public interest. Even the DPP himself may be prosecuted despite his position, and while he can figuratively discontinue his own prosecution, he cannot escape public outcry, censure and removal for corruption by impeachment.

 

In the present circumstances, the police have been serially sending files like proverbial flies to the DPP for prosecution in an unprecedented manner, for serious and insignificant matters, causing that office holder to experience logjam or gridlock within his finite capacity. As he did in the case of the SoE arrests, the DPP can step in and discontinue cases that justifiably deserve such relief, but the police can and must initiate prosecution in clear cases that defy exculpation. The police have or should have access to SCs and other senior lawyers whose opinions may be sought out of police budget, without burdening the DPP’s own sources. It would then devolve on the DPP to stop cases that are less worthy of pursuit. Passing the buck puts justice on hold and corrupts the very face of justice. Indeed, the AG must start serious prosecutions from his office as the US AG frequently does, and not be trammeled by the overburdened DPP’s office.

 

MF Rahman

Via e-mail