The awareness is slowly gaining ground that the regulation of the functions and careers of public prosecutors cannot be identical to that of judges, as their functions are different and, therefore, so are the aptitudes, mental habits, and professional skills required to perform such different tasks: the public prosecutor is an investigator in all respects, while the judge is the arbiter of the dispute. We must move in this direction, setting aside the specter of the prosecutor's dependence on the executive and the discretion of criminal prosecution, which is regularly touted whenever the differentiation of careers is discussed. To deny the specificity of prosecutorial functions as opposed to judicial ones, in an anachronistic attempt to continue to consider the judiciary as a single entity, paradoxically amounts to guaranteeing less independence and autonomy for the judiciary itself.