Pros and cons: The role of prosecutors toward criminal investigation under check and balance procedure in the criminal justice system of Thailand

Abstract

The public frequently questions the transparency and justice issues of the Thai police investigation system. This uncertainty leads to a lack of public confidence in the investigation processes whenever major cases occur, especially cases involving police officers. In efforts to reform the criminal investigation system, the Thai government has established several committees to resolve problems caused by the system’s faults, enhance its reliability, and provide genuine justice for all. These committees have suggested that from the beginning, prosecutors should be allowed to engage in criminal investigations to increase investigative standards and provide more transparency to the public. These proposed changes may also resolve fundamental problems in the current system, such as
inadequate evidence, delays in the investigation processes, and the intervention of influential figures. In answer to the above issues, this research examines the role of prosecutors in the criminal investigation processes. This study found three possible options consisting of: (1) Public prosecutors can participate in the investigation process at the beginning of every criminal case; (2) Public prosecutors are involved in the investigation process at the beginning of the criminal investigation based on their discretionary power; and (3) Public prosecutors perform their role with the inquiry police at the beginning investigation process only in special or serious cases for enhancing the criminal investigation system in Thailand by allowing prosecutors to be early on involved in criminal investigations. Finally, the study provides pros and cons for each option for developing the investigation system in Thailand.