Does the absence of a public member impact the powers of the Discipline Committee or the Investigative Committee?

The absence of a public member from the Discipline Committee or the Investigative Committee does not influence their operations, as these committees are typically designed to function effectively regardless of the presence of a public member. The role of public members often serves to ensure a broader perspective and to enhance public trust, but their absence does not inherently limit the committees' ability to conduct investigations or make decisions within their defined scope.

Professionally, these committees operate under established frameworks that allow them to carry out their responsibilities, including handling complaints and making disciplinary decisions based on the relevant evidence and findings. The fundamental powers and authority granted to these committees remain intact without a public member present. Therefore, their ability to fulfill their roles is not fundamentally compromised by such an absence.

The other choices suggest various limitations and impacts that could arise from the absence of a public member, but in practice, committees are designed to maintain their functional integrity and procedural efficacy to ensure justice and proper governance regardless of their composition.