By Sri Lanka is considering a major legal reform—the establishment of an Independent Prosecutor’s Office (IPO). This raises important questions: How do such offices function in other countries? Will it strengthen justice or undermine the power of the Attorney General (AG)?
Why Are Independent Prosecutors Established?
Independent prosecutors are typically created to prevent political interference in legal proceedings. In many systems, the Attorney General’s office is part of the government, meaning it may be pressured to protect political allies or target opponents.
An Independent Prosecutor’s Office, however, would operate without political influence, ensuring that prosecutions are based solely on evidence and law, rather than political considerations.
How Do Other Countries Handle Prosecutions?
United States 🇺🇸 – The Department of Justice (DOJ) oversees prosecutions, but in cases involving high-profile officials, a Special Counsel (Independent Prosecutor) can be appointed to avoid conflicts of interest.
United Kingdom 🇬🇧 – The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is independent of the government, ensuring legal decisions are not swayed by political pressure.
France 🇫🇷 – The Prosecutor’s Office (Parquet) operates under the Ministry of Justice, though reforms have aimed to enhance its autonomy.
Canada 🇨🇦 – The Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC) is independent from political influence, prosecuting cases fairly and transparently.
Germany 🇩🇪 – Prosecutors (Staatsanwaltschaft) are technically under the Justice Ministry but operate with significant independence.
Many democratic systems use some form of independent prosecutorial authority to enhance public trust and ensure fairness in legal proceedings.
Would an Independent Prosecutor Undermine the Attorney General?
Some legal experts argue that creating an IPO separate from the AG’s Department could lead to conflicts over jurisdiction.
✅ Pros of an IPO:
Reduces political interference in legal decisions.
Strengthens public trust in the justice system.
Prevents delays or selective prosecution by the AG’s office.
❌ Cons of an IPO:
Could create power struggles between the AG and the IPO.
May duplicate efforts, leading to inefficiencies.
Risk of politicization if appointments are not handled transparently.
Will This Solve Sri Lanka’s Legal Problems?
Sri Lanka’s justice system has faced criticism over the years, with allegations of selective prosecution and political influence. If properly structured, an IPO could ensure equal justice for all—but if not, it could become just another bureaucratic entity.
For now, government discussions continue, with legal experts debating whether the IPO should function under the AG’s office or as a separate entity. The final decision could reshape Sri Lanka’s legal landscape for years to come.
