The nominee for the position of Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) has given some interesting insights into a matter that has sparked a lot of controversy. This is the recent spree of withdrawals of high-profile criminal and corruption cases.
It was in the last days of the tenure of former DPP Noordin Haji that many apparently well-connected individuals walked scot-free, bringing the top prosecutor’s office under serious scrutiny.
Ideally, the public expects that when suspects are dragged to court, there is sufficient evidence against them. This is why the new DPP must strive to do things properly and procedurally.
Mr Renson Mulele has been candid with the parliamentary committee vetting him, revealing that the cases were withdrawn because they were destined to fail.
Obtaining evidence illegally, which could not have withstood the trial test in court and the desire to save taxpayers’ money, he says, are the major reasons why the cases were dropped.
According to the DPP nominee, some witnesses had sworn on oath that they had obtained evidence through illegal means. However, while presumed innocent until proven guilty, the mere fact of being taken to court has cast aspersions on their characters. This matter is not done and dusted. They could still sue the State for compensation for malicious prosecution.
Should he be confirmed, Mr Mulele, who is not a newcomer, as he is a senior assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, should review other cases as well. But most importantly, all cases must always be thoroughly investigated.
The withdrawal of 10,000 cases countrywide is in itself an indictment of public prosecutions. According to Mr Mulele, while the focus is only on the high-profile suspects, the withdrawal of cases happens daily, and is constitutional.
His assurance that he will be guided by the rule of law and that there will be no political interference in the discharge of his duties is crucial. In all cases, justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done.
