Time and again Court has said, there should not be any element of political consideration in matters like appointment of a Public Prosecutor. The only consideration for Government should be ‘merit’. A good, seasoned and experienced Public Prosecutor will not only bring contradictions on record, but will also cross-examine a hostile witness at length. It is not sufficient for a Public Prosecutor while cross-examining a hostile witness to merely hurl suggestions, as mere suggestions have no evidentiary value.
The impact of a Court appearance on a child and duty of Court towards a child witness have been very succinctly explained by Constitutional Court of South Africa in Director of Public Prosecutions, Transwal v. Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development reported in (2009) 4 SA 222 (CC).
“Court operates in an atmosphere which is intended to be imposing. It is an atmosphere which is foreign to a child. The effect may be to reduce a child to a state of terrified silence. Instances of children who have been so frightened are not unknown. The questioning of a child requires special skills. Regrettably, not all of our Prosecutors are adequately trained.”
Even if a Prosecutor is remiss or lethargic in some ways, Court should control proceedings effectively so that truth is arrived at. Court must be conscious of serious pitfalls and dereliction of duty.
The Last Word 