Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 493264,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/493264/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 261,
    "type": "other",
    "speaker_name": "",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "view up to now as I speak. That is the view I held as AG about this case, and the view I have now is still the same. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, I have been a prosecutor in charge of prosecutions for more than twenty years. However, what concerns me about this case is that when I became AG, one of the things that were attacked by the international community and the civil society, was that people were being whisked to go to court to answer criminal charges. But when they were in court, the prosecutor would then say that they should not be given bail as investigations were still going on. In other words, at the time, they were charged. However, the prosecution did not have enough evidence to prosecute them, but they were charged. They were hauled before the courts and denied bail because they would interfere with the investigations which were on going. That was yet the main criticism not only internationally, but even locally about our criminal justice system. Therefore, I took it upon myself to come up with a proper national prosecution policy hailed all over the world. It is the best prosecution policy that a prosecutor should have. We launched that policy. That policy stated that one should never be charged criminally in a court of law where there is no sufficient evidence. In other words, the prosecutor must satisfy himself or herself that there is enough evidence before deciding to prosecute. Of course, a prosecutor may just be reading an investigation file. If in the course of a trial, it turns out that some of the witnesses’ statements are being challenged successfully or are being doubted, we feel that this case cannot be proved, then the honourable thing to do according to this prosecution policy which was also there under our Act, is to withdraw the case under what was Section 87(a) of our criminal procedure code. All these things were there. Mr. Temporary Speaker, Sir, what concerns me is that one judge stated somewhere that the prosecution failed to properly investigate the case in accordance with its statutory obligations. In other words, the investigations were not properly done by the investigator. That is what one judge has said. Secondly, the prosecutor now admitting that at this time, do not have sufficient evidence to prove alleged criminal responsibility. Those two statements, one coming from the judge, another one coming from the prosecutor, leads me to think that this is a case which should either be terminated or be withdrawn and when they have enough evidence, they can now bring it back to court. One should not be burdened with a very heavy burden of carrying on that the charge is still there as the investigator is trying to find out more evidence to be able to indict him. In fact, that is more or less punishment before the case has been proved in court. That is one of the things that I think is wrong with this case. That is the best prosecution policy which we expect from an international criminal court which is The electronic version of the Senate Hansard Report is for information purposes only. A certified version of this Report can be obtained from the Hansard Editor, Senate."
}