The appointment of public prosecutors for the riot cases has raised legal as well as moral questions, given the fact that this has to be made by the state Legal Department, which is headed by state minister Amit Shah. This assumes significance as he is among the 63 people whose role in the 2002 riots is going to be probed by Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT).

The Gujarat High Court has already designated nine special judges for conducting trial of as many heinous cases of the 2002 mayhem as per Supreme Court directions.

In the past, the Narendra Modi government had been accused of appointing those advocates who subscribed to one particular political ideology and this had allegedly resulted in accused persons getting bails and acquittals.

Pointing out that such a situation has arisen for the first time in the criminal justice system of the country, one of the seniormost advocates practising in the High Court, Girish Patel, said, “It will be neither legally nor morally proper for Shah to participate in the process to appoint public prosecutors.”

“Ideally, the minister should step down to ensure an independent appointment of public prosecutors,” added Patel, who is one of the pioneers of public interest petitions in the country.

Echoing the views of Patel, another senior High Court lawyer, Mukul Sinha, said that the best course for the minister will be to keep himself away from the appointment process. He argues that the Home and Law departments must go strictly by the suggestions of the SIT to ensure objectivity, transparency and independence in the appointments.

The Leader of the Opposition in the state Assembly, Shaktisinh Gohil, said: “In the first place, Shah should have resigned by now on moral grounds, as his name figures in the list of 63 people whose role in the riots is going to be probed. Even if the minister is reluctant to resign, he should keep himself off the administrative process that the Legal Department is going to initiate to appoint public prosecutors.”

Gohil, who is also a prominent HC lawyer, contends that the SIT can exercise its full powers and ensure that the names of PPs suggested by it are endorsed in toto by the Legal Department.

“In case the government attempts to make any changes in the list of PPs as recommended by the SIT, the investigating agency can certainly seek further guidance from the apex court,” the Congress leader told Newsline on Saturday.

A senior Legal Department official, however, explained that as Shah figures in the list of 63 accused, he cannot participate in the process of appointing PPs.

“In such a situation, our law secretary, being the administrative head of the department, can fulfil the obligation of appointing PPs in consultation with the SIT, without approaching the minister,” the official said.