LETTER | When I first heard Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim commit to amending the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) Act, I felt hopeful.

Reforming how we appoint our judges is an essential move toward strengthening judicial independence. But that hope is incomplete - because if we stop there, it’s not enough.

To me, true justice means more than just fair judges. It must also mean fair prosecution.

Right now, the attorney-general in Malaysia holds two roles: as legal adviser to the government and as the public prosecutor. That’s a serious conflict of interest. No one should be expected to act impartially while answering the executive.

This isn’t just a theoretical concern. We’ve seen time and again how public confidence in our justice system gets shaken - especially in high-profile or politically sensitive cases.

When charges are suddenly dropped or proceedings stall without clear reasons, people start asking: Is this about justice, or is this about power?

Not unrelated projects

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said has said that her office is studying the separation of the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) from the prosecution function. That’s a positive step, and I respect that meaningful reform takes time.

But I believe it also takes willpower - and a sense of urgency.

We can’t afford to treat judicial reform and prosecutorial reform as separate, unrelated projects. They’re two halves of the same system. If we depoliticise judicial appointments but allow prosecution to remain under the shadow of executive influence, we’re only halfway to where we need to be.

I’ve always believed that justice doesn’t begin in the courtroom. It begins much earlier - with the decision to prosecute, to press charges, or to drop a case. If that process is influenced by political loyalty rather than legal merit, then even the most independent judge can’t ensure a fair outcome.

By the time a case reaches trial, the damage may already be done.

I’m not alone in wanting a system where decisions about who gets prosecuted - and who doesn’t - are made without fear, favour, or interference. I’ve spoken to many fellow young Malaysians who are disillusioned by how inconsistent our legal outcomes can appear.

Separation is needed

Trust is hard to build, and even harder to win back once it’s lost.

We’re not reinventing the wheel. Countries like the United Kingdom and Canada have long separated the roles of legal adviser and public prosecutor. Even within the Commonwealth tradition, where Malaysia’s legal system finds its roots, there’s growing recognition that these roles must be kept apart to preserve institutional integrity.

I’m not calling for change for the sake of change. I’m calling for a system that respects justice, not just in theory, but in everyday practice. A system where the AG provides legal counsel to the government, while an independent public prosecutions director carries out criminal proceedings without interference.

This matters not just for today, but for the future. Governments come and go. Political winds shift. But our institutions must be built to endure.

If the current administration truly wants to be remembered for reform, then it must act boldly now, not just on judicial appointments, but on prosecutorial independence too.

I believe Malaysians are ready. We’re not asking for perfection. We’re asking for consistency. For fairness. For a system we can believe in again.

If we really want to restore confidence in the rule of law, we need more than piecemeal reform. Judicial reform without prosecutorial independence is like a courtroom with no doors - it looks fine on the outside, but it can’t keep justice in or corruption out.

Let’s finish what we started. Let’s build a justice system that protects everyone, no matter their rank, wealth, or political ties.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.