Allegations that the Prosecution Division of the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) is weak and incapable especially in handling high profile cases are unfounded and unsubstantiated, said Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail.

He said the chambers took note and fully appreciated the concerns of the general public.

He pointed out that whether a certain person is charged, depended solely on whether there existed sufficient evidence to prove the charge against the accused.

"Upon charging, Deputy Public Prosecutors will then present the available and admissible evidence to prove the prosecutions case. What has to be stressed here is that no evidence necessary to prove the charge will be left out.

"The duty to tender all evidence also includes the calling of all essential witnesses. This however is wholly dependent upon the availability and cooperativeness of the witnesses in giving their testimony in court," stressed Abdul Gani in a media statement, today.

He further pointed out that whether a witness truthfully testifies, however, was not within the power of the prosecutors.

"What matters here is that we never embellish or fabricate evidence and what we ultimately do, should a witness turn hostile, is to impeach him and in turn charge him for perjury," added Abdul Gani.

He said it was also necessary to reiterate that once all evidence of the prosecution case were presented, it was then left to the court to decide on whether the charge had been proven against the accused.

"How and what the courts decide is a matter beyond our control and power. Nevertheless, if we are of the view that the decision is flawed, we will exercise our right to appeal," assured Abdul Gani.

On the appointment of deputy public prosecutors, he explained that cases were assigned to Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs) according to the complexities and intricacies present in the case at hand, whereby cases which involve a higher degree of complexity will be handled by senior DPPs.

In the media statement, Abdul Gani also touched on the difficulties faced by the AGC especially in high profile cases, including the Mongolian woman murder case where the main grounds of acquittal by the Court of Appeal were the non-directions of the trial judge on issues raised by the appellants and the non-calling of DSP Musa Safri.

He said that while respecting the Court of Appeal, non-direction or misdirection of the trial court should not be attributed to the prosecution "as it had nothing to do with the conduct of the prosecution".

He said that the AGC maintained that Musa's testimony sheds no relevance to the narrative of the prosecution's case.

"Hence, this Office has filed an appeal to the Federal Court," he said.

Meanwhile, on the acquittal of former Transport Minister Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik on a cheating case based on testimonies of two ex-ministers and former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdul Gani said the court had held that there was no element of concealment, deception, misrepresentation or inducement on the part of the accused in regards to the purchase of the said land.

"This ruling was evidently a finding of fact based on the credibility of the former ministers.

"The Court ruled that based on the former ministers interpretation, it was highly unlikely that the Cabinet had been falsely induced to approve the purchase of the land," said Abdul Gani, adding that it would be trite to appeal the decision as it would be difficult to argue that the Court had erred in its finding of fact.