An Appraisal of the Use of Plea Bargaining in the Nigerian Justice System

Abstract

Plea bargaining as an instrument of justice dispensing has been vilified by many judicial actors and political commentators. This is due to the popular opinion that it favors corrupt high-ranking public and private officials when they are made to face the law. This opinion is anchored on the Marxist school of thought that emphasizes the economic power of the political actors above other societal elements, including the justice system. However, this study reveals that plea bargaining principles also have its merits. Among the identified merits is the fact that plea bargaining helps to reduce the cost of ligation and other associated costs that the State needs to bear in the course of prosecuting corrupt suspects. Also, by deciding cases summarily and speedily through plea bargaining, the court can have time for other cases that need speedy attention thereby ensuring that those concerns receive timely justice. Plea bargaining as an instrument of justice dispensing needs to be encouraged albeit with modifications. The modification should include an element of sufficient deterrence, despite the cooperation of the accused. The essay suggests how to balance the gains of plea bargaining with thorough and truthful dispensing of justice. I submit that plea bargaining is not unjust but there must be a legal framework within the Nigerian justice system that will be a template that will prescribe when, how and for which case the principle can be applied.