Maha Balakrishnan, a research fellow at Sunway University, said the current draft of the bill does not say who the new public prosecutor would be answerable to.

“The new public prosecutor cannot be forced to answer to anybody. We cannot accept a piece of legislation simply because the fear of what currently exists overwhelms us.

“Yes, the situation we have right now is untenable, but the prime minister can at least be forced to come to Parliament and answer questions.

“The law minister can be forced to answer questions about what the government is proposing,” she said at a forum at the Malaysian Bar headquarters here today.

However, Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman also cautioned at the same forum that the proposed law may not see the light of day for the next five years, saying it would be delayed if the bill is not tabled before the next general election.

He said that at a recent closed-door meeting, “lines were clearly drawn”, referring to conflicting demands from multiple groups, including the opposition, bureaucrats and the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

On April 16, law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said said the government hoped to find a “middle ground” before June as it moves to split the roles of the attorney-general and public prosecutor.

She said Putrajaya is continuing to gather views from NGOs, the AGC and political parties ahead of tabling the constitutional amendments.

On March 3, the government announced that the bill to separate the dual functions of the attorney-general had been postponed and referred to a newly established parliamentary committee.