Prosecutor’s Role in Witness Testimony and Due Process Rights
Ms. Doris, an American national, appeared to testify during her stay in Thailand. She was arrested by Mr. Ching , a police officer, and seized property was taken. She was handed over to the investigating officers, who questioned her and determined that Ms. Doris intended to return to a foreign country. The prosecutor promptly brought Ms. Doris in for sworn testimony in court to serve as evidence in the case against Mr. Ching . Specifically, the prosecutor considered whether they would take action based on the request of the investigating officers, and why. The public prosecutor is not merely empowered to deal with criminal cases by making opinions to indict or not indict. Instead, as a public attorney, as stipulated in Sections 101 and 15 of the Penal Code, the prosecutor must prepare a sworn statement for Ms. Doris, who the prosecutor must cite as a witness in subsequent proceedings. It is difficult to establish this in the circumstances, which is not contrary to the principles of evidence in court. As disclosed before the defendant, as stipulated in Section 17 of the Penal Code, the accused is entitled to hear the evidence being investigated. The public prosecutor is a government official within the executive branch of power. It is his direct responsibility and the sanctity of law which are the common concern of the public prosecutor, thus has more control over the protection of the citizenry than any other public servant. His role is one of the most beneficent forces in our society. From malice or other base motives, he can be a repressive public officer. Personal freedom must be tempered with the peace and good order of the community. Every society must have powers to arrest, to search marauders, as long as those powers are properly exercised. However, if those powers are abused, there is no tyranny when the police may arrest any man and throw him in jail. It leads to the search of his home and belongings, pretext or on none.