The Concept of Plea Bargaining: A Veritable Tool for Justice or Corruption Under The Nigerian Crimin
THE CONCEPT OF PLEA BARGAINING: A VERITABLE TOOL FOR JUSTICE OR CORRUPTION UNDER THE NIGERIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
Written by: ADEBAYO OLUWASEYI OLAYIWOLA (N.D) Bus. Admin. & Mgt. FEDPOLY Ede; LL.B (Hons) O.A.U; B.L 2013
Introduction
The concept of Plea bargain has its origin in the United States of America as part of their belief that society is dynamic, so the law needs to keep up with it. The practice came about as a potent weapon in their criminal law jurisprudence. Plea bargain was first used in the United States of America in the year 1973 when her Vice President, Spiro Agnew, was made to resign on the accounts of fraud, but was later convicted of his refusal to pay taxes. However, in the 1960s the Scholars had begun to shed light on plea bargain but the concept was endorsed by US Supreme Court and upheld the process in the 1970 case of BRADY v. UNITED STATES 394 US 742, 90 S.C.T. 1463, 25 L.Ed., 2d 747 (1970). The concept was given credence in the case of PERKINS v. COURT OF APPEALS 738 S.W. 2d 276, 282 (Tex Crim. App. 1978) where certain number of safeguards into the bargaining process was laid down and the court held that:
The promise of a prosecutor made during plea negotiations must be kept.
To be valid, a guilty plea had to be made voluntary and with full knowledge of its implications.
The concept of plea bargaining in the recent times was introduced vide The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 in Chapter XXIA of Code of Criminal Procedure.
In order to have a concrete insight of the said topic, it is pertinent to define certain keywords as embedded in the topic; such words as €Corruption€, €Criminal€, €Justice€, €Criminal Justice€ etc.
What is corruption?
It has been defined as: depravity, perversion, or taint; an impairment of integrity virtue, or moral principle; especially the impairment of public officials' duties by bribery.
Who then is a criminal?
Simply put, a criminal is one who has committed a criminal offense.
What is justice?
Justice has been defined as €the fair and proper administration of laws.
Meaning of Plea bargaining:
The concept of Plea bargaining in Criminal cases refers to pre-trial negotiations between the defendant through his/her Counsel and the prosecution during which the accused agrees to plead guilty in exchange for lesser punishment. Also, a plea bargain/plea agreement is an agreement in criminal cases whereby the prosecutor offers the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty, usually to a lesser charge or to the original criminal charge with a recommendation of a lighter punishment than the maximum sentence.
Plea bargain has also been referred to as a deal offer by a prosecutor as an incentive for a defendant to plead guilty. It is also referred to as a negotiated agreement between a prosecutor and a criminal defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offence or to one of the multiple charges in exchange for some concession by the prosecutor, usually a more lenient sentence or a dismissal of the other charges.
Types of Plea bargain
Plea bargaining though relatively novel to Nigerian Criminal Justice System is already being practiced in other countries across the globe for a long period of time. In fact, this concept is a norm in the United State of America as stated above whereby 75% of the Criminal cases get decided on plea bargaining. Hence, the types of plea bargaining is as follows:
CHARGE BARGAIN: under this type, the accused has the option of pleading guilty to a lesser charge or to only some of the charges filed against him. For instance, a defendant charged with burglary may be offered the privilege to plead guilty to €attempted burglary€; or a defendant charged with assault and molestation; may be offered the opportunity to plead guilty to just the molestation charge.
SENTENCE BARGAIN: this occurs when a defendant is told in advance what his sentence will be if he pleads guilty. For instance, if a defendant is facing serious charges and is afraid of being convicted with maximum sentence, he may plead guilty and be punished with an acceptable sentence which limits the severe punishment accrued to the defendant.
According to Lord Justice Denning M.R in one of his dictums where he said and I quote: €Justice is rooted in confidence, and the confidence is destroyed when a right thinking person walks away thinking the Judge is biased in the case€.
Also, the legal maxim €Fiat Justitia Ruat Coleum€ meaning €let justice be done even if heaven will fall€
In line with the aforesaid, it is highly fundamental to ask this question: why bargaining with an accused defendant and not allowing the law to take its full course (simplicita) on anyone who is alleged and found guilty of embezzling, stealing or looting public funds which belongs to all the citizens (innocent tax payers) of the nation?
Conversely, it is quite shocking and alarming that the concept promotes bargain with an accused defendant all in the name of ensuring that both parties do not loss out at the end of the day. At this juncture, it is ideal to critically examine the aims and objectives of this concept to wit; a country like Nigeria where most public office holders loot and embezzle public funds with full guts and confidence at the detriment of the masses without considering their plights and havoc such heinous act bring on them.
Not only this, the concept (plea bargaining) which promotes bargain between the prosecutor and the defendant (accused) whereby an agreement is reached and the defendant plead guilty to some of the offences charged with before trial and enjoys lesser sentence. This kind of arrangement is of no doubt berated our criminal justice system and judicial system, knowing well that the judiciary is being referred as to €the last hope of a common man€ and it is highly imperative for the judiciary to dispense the carrot and stick of justice without any fear, favouritism or partiality. Going by this concept, this cannot be obtained under our criminal justice system due to the fact that its preempt true justice on one hand and limits the Court (Judges) on the other hand from implementing the full measures of law as provided for in our various Criminal Statutes against any erring criminal and such it is nothing but a mockery of our criminal justice system and a clog in the wheel of progress of the judiciary in dispensing true justice.
According to the words of Prof. G.S. Pande, in his article Criminal Justice; these were some of the observations and suggestions, he opined and they go thus:
€Punishment for an offence must be according to the gravity of the offence, personality of the offender, the nature of his guilt and other relevant circumstances. It need not be retributive alone. Reform and rehabilitation of the criminal, wherever feasible without unduly endangering the social life, is necessary, but for offences which pose a real treat to the normal life in the society and which are of cruel nature, detriment punishment must be awarded. If punishment is inadequate, there is every likelihood of repetition.€
Typical illustrations to buttress this assertion are not farfetched, but I shall mention just a few. Precisely, December 18th, 2008, the Federal High Court sitting in Enugu delivered a judgment in the case involving former Governor of Edo State in person of Lucky Igbinedion where he was charged for looting N4.4 billion public funds belonging to the State, acquiring of palatial houses and properties for himself within and outside the country at the detriment of the people of Edo State who ought to be the beneficiaries of the funds. While delivering his judgment, Justice Abdul Tafari only fined the former Governor a paltry sum of N3.5million out of the said huge amount embezzled with no option of jail time for egregious crime of plundering the Edo State treasury for solid eight years in office. The concept (plea-bargain) was also used during the case of the former I
Written by: ADEBAYO OLUWASEYI OLAYIWOLA (N.D) Bus. Admin. & Mgt. FEDPOLY Ede; LL.B (Hons) O.A.U; B.L 2013
Introduction
The concept of Plea bargain has its origin in the United States of America as part of their belief that society is dynamic, so the law needs to keep up with it. The practice came about as a potent weapon in their criminal law jurisprudence. Plea bargain was first used in the United States of America in the year 1973 when her Vice President, Spiro Agnew, was made to resign on the accounts of fraud, but was later convicted of his refusal to pay taxes. However, in the 1960s the Scholars had begun to shed light on plea bargain but the concept was endorsed by US Supreme Court and upheld the process in the 1970 case of BRADY v. UNITED STATES 394 US 742, 90 S.C.T. 1463, 25 L.Ed., 2d 747 (1970). The concept was given credence in the case of PERKINS v. COURT OF APPEALS 738 S.W. 2d 276, 282 (Tex Crim. App. 1978) where certain number of safeguards into the bargaining process was laid down and the court held that:
The promise of a prosecutor made during plea negotiations must be kept.
To be valid, a guilty plea had to be made voluntary and with full knowledge of its implications.
The concept of plea bargaining in the recent times was introduced vide The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 in Chapter XXIA of Code of Criminal Procedure.
In order to have a concrete insight of the said topic, it is pertinent to define certain keywords as embedded in the topic; such words as €Corruption€, €Criminal€, €Justice€, €Criminal Justice€ etc.
What is corruption?
It has been defined as: depravity, perversion, or taint; an impairment of integrity virtue, or moral principle; especially the impairment of public officials' duties by bribery.
Who then is a criminal?
Simply put, a criminal is one who has committed a criminal offense.
What is justice?
Justice has been defined as €the fair and proper administration of laws.
Meaning of Plea bargaining:
The concept of Plea bargaining in Criminal cases refers to pre-trial negotiations between the defendant through his/her Counsel and the prosecution during which the accused agrees to plead guilty in exchange for lesser punishment. Also, a plea bargain/plea agreement is an agreement in criminal cases whereby the prosecutor offers the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty, usually to a lesser charge or to the original criminal charge with a recommendation of a lighter punishment than the maximum sentence.
Plea bargain has also been referred to as a deal offer by a prosecutor as an incentive for a defendant to plead guilty. It is also referred to as a negotiated agreement between a prosecutor and a criminal defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offence or to one of the multiple charges in exchange for some concession by the prosecutor, usually a more lenient sentence or a dismissal of the other charges.
Types of Plea bargain
Plea bargaining though relatively novel to Nigerian Criminal Justice System is already being practiced in other countries across the globe for a long period of time. In fact, this concept is a norm in the United State of America as stated above whereby 75% of the Criminal cases get decided on plea bargaining. Hence, the types of plea bargaining is as follows:
CHARGE BARGAIN: under this type, the accused has the option of pleading guilty to a lesser charge or to only some of the charges filed against him. For instance, a defendant charged with burglary may be offered the privilege to plead guilty to €attempted burglary€; or a defendant charged with assault and molestation; may be offered the opportunity to plead guilty to just the molestation charge.
SENTENCE BARGAIN: this occurs when a defendant is told in advance what his sentence will be if he pleads guilty. For instance, if a defendant is facing serious charges and is afraid of being convicted with maximum sentence, he may plead guilty and be punished with an acceptable sentence which limits the severe punishment accrued to the defendant.
According to Lord Justice Denning M.R in one of his dictums where he said and I quote: €Justice is rooted in confidence, and the confidence is destroyed when a right thinking person walks away thinking the Judge is biased in the case€.
Also, the legal maxim €Fiat Justitia Ruat Coleum€ meaning €let justice be done even if heaven will fall€
In line with the aforesaid, it is highly fundamental to ask this question: why bargaining with an accused defendant and not allowing the law to take its full course (simplicita) on anyone who is alleged and found guilty of embezzling, stealing or looting public funds which belongs to all the citizens (innocent tax payers) of the nation?
Conversely, it is quite shocking and alarming that the concept promotes bargain with an accused defendant all in the name of ensuring that both parties do not loss out at the end of the day. At this juncture, it is ideal to critically examine the aims and objectives of this concept to wit; a country like Nigeria where most public office holders loot and embezzle public funds with full guts and confidence at the detriment of the masses without considering their plights and havoc such heinous act bring on them.
Not only this, the concept (plea bargaining) which promotes bargain between the prosecutor and the defendant (accused) whereby an agreement is reached and the defendant plead guilty to some of the offences charged with before trial and enjoys lesser sentence. This kind of arrangement is of no doubt berated our criminal justice system and judicial system, knowing well that the judiciary is being referred as to €the last hope of a common man€ and it is highly imperative for the judiciary to dispense the carrot and stick of justice without any fear, favouritism or partiality. Going by this concept, this cannot be obtained under our criminal justice system due to the fact that its preempt true justice on one hand and limits the Court (Judges) on the other hand from implementing the full measures of law as provided for in our various Criminal Statutes against any erring criminal and such it is nothing but a mockery of our criminal justice system and a clog in the wheel of progress of the judiciary in dispensing true justice.
According to the words of Prof. G.S. Pande, in his article Criminal Justice; these were some of the observations and suggestions, he opined and they go thus:
€Punishment for an offence must be according to the gravity of the offence, personality of the offender, the nature of his guilt and other relevant circumstances. It need not be retributive alone. Reform and rehabilitation of the criminal, wherever feasible without unduly endangering the social life, is necessary, but for offences which pose a real treat to the normal life in the society and which are of cruel nature, detriment punishment must be awarded. If punishment is inadequate, there is every likelihood of repetition.€
Typical illustrations to buttress this assertion are not farfetched, but I shall mention just a few. Precisely, December 18th, 2008, the Federal High Court sitting in Enugu delivered a judgment in the case involving former Governor of Edo State in person of Lucky Igbinedion where he was charged for looting N4.4 billion public funds belonging to the State, acquiring of palatial houses and properties for himself within and outside the country at the detriment of the people of Edo State who ought to be the beneficiaries of the funds. While delivering his judgment, Justice Abdul Tafari only fined the former Governor a paltry sum of N3.5million out of the said huge amount embezzled with no option of jail time for egregious crime of plundering the Edo State treasury for solid eight years in office. The concept (plea-bargain) was also used during the case of the former I
