Overview

• Type of Hearing: Request

• Submitted: 4 weeks ago (10/Jun/2026 08:50:53 PM UTC)
• Hearing Location:
• Hearing Verdict:

• Date Scheduled:
• Time Scheduled:

Information

To the Honorable Supreme Court,

The Department of Justice respectfully submits this Request for Interpretation concerning the proper legal procedure for anonymous case submissions and the extent to which an individual who was not present for, or a witness to, an alleged criminal act may submit a case in their own name.

The Department of Justice understands that Prosecution Act 2025, Part 4, Section 3 provides a procedure for anonymous submissions, under which a witness may submit all relevant evidence to the Department of Justice so that the Department may pursue the matter while preserving the submitting witness’s anonymity. However, the statute requires interpretation as to whether that procedure is mandatory where the person with direct knowledge of the alleged crime does not wish to appear as the public complainant, and whether a separate user who was not present may submit the case in their own name.

Accordingly, the Department of Justice respectfully requests that the Supreme Court interpret the following questions:

1. Anonymous Submission Procedure
How must an anonymous case submission be properly made under Prosecution Act 2025, Part 4, Section 3?

2. Required Role of the Witness
Does Prosecution Act 2025, Part 4, Section 3 require the actual witness or evidence-holder to submit the evidence directly to the Department of Justice when requesting that the Department proceed anonymously on their behalf?

3. Standing of Non-Witness Submitters
May a user who was not present at the alleged scene of the crime, and who did not personally witness the alleged criminal conduct, submit a case in their own name without using the anonymous submission procedure?

4. Distinction Between Anonymous and Non-Anonymous Complaints
Where the true witness or evidence-holder wishes not to be publicly identified, must the matter proceed as an anonymous submission through the Department of Justice, rather than as a non-anonymous complaint filed by another user?

5. Procedural Validity of Improper Submissions
If a case is submitted by a user who was not present, did not witness the alleged crime, and did not follow the anonymous submission process, is such a case procedurally defective?

The Department of Justice submits that clarification is necessary to ensure that future criminal complaints are submitted in accordance with the Prosecution Act 2025, that anonymous witnesses are protected through the proper statutory process, and that cases are not improperly initiated by individuals lacking direct knowledge of the alleged conduct.

For these reasons, the Department of Justice respectfully requests that the Supreme Court issue an interpretation clarifying the required procedure for anonymous submissions and whether non-witness users may submit cases without proceeding anonymously.

Respectfully submitted,

ICEMAN
Attorney General
Department of Justice

Court Opinion

Written by dreckly on 01/Jul/2026 03:24:00 PM UTC

The Supreme Court has decided that this request does not meet the requirements per Part 8, Section 10 of the Prosecution Act 2025, which is clear in that the Supreme Court may issue an interpretation for a word or phrase which is not defined or where the definition is not clear.

We are of the opinion that, where someone wishes to submit a case anonymously, they are to contact the Department of Justice, who shall subsequently process the case, ensuring appropriate redaction of identifying information.