Supreme Court Places Greater Burden on Public Prosecutors in Proving Alleged Facts


January 31, 2012

Under the current criminal procedure, a judge has a power to investigate on its own initiative for the purposes of finding the truth or maintaining fairness; however, the scope of such investigation has been in dispute by scholars and practitioners alike as to whether such investigation should be limited to evidence that would benefit the accused. Given the uncertainties, many judges had been said to dig deep into the alleged facts not otherwise uncovered or proven by the public prosecutors, causing the public prosecutors to shirk at times in doing their job. The Supreme Court issued its decision on January 17th and rationalized that such a decision would be in line with the intent of the criminal procedure such that it will solidify the burden of the prosecution and better conform to the great principle of presumed innocence [of an accused].  It is expected that judges will more focus on trying cases instead of doing the prosecutors’ job and thus, they will be perceived by the public to be a neutral umpire, consistent with the spirit called for by an adversarial system as opposed to an inquisitorial one.  Also expected are lower rates of indictment and remands by higher courts for retrial.