LEGAL FRAMEWORKS, MERITS AND DEMERITS OF PLEA BARGAINING AS ALTERNATIVE MECHANISM FOR RESOLVING CRIMINAL DISPUTES IN NIGERIA

Abstract

The objective of every criminal justice system is to maintain law and order, ensure that offenders are brought to justice, while the rights of the accused and interests of society are all safeguarded. Over the years, Nigeria adopted full adversarial trials in which the prosecution was required to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Currently, the rapid increase in criminal cases, chronic congestion of courts, prolonged pre-trial detention, overcrowded correctional centres, and the constitutional imperative of speedy justice have necessitated the introduction of alternative mechanisms such as plea bargaining for resolving criminal disputes. This review paper examined the historical background, legal frameworks, merits and demerits of plea bargaining which has become statutorily recognized under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and analogous state laws. The paper appreciates that plea bargaining provides an effective mechanism for reducing court congestion, promoting speedy trials, minimizing litigation costs, and recovering proceeds of crime. However, concerns were also expressed about unequal application, the imposition of lenient punishments for serious offences, and the possibility of abuse by influential offenders. It was thus recommended that for plea bargaining to achieve its intended objectives in Nigeria, prosecutors must exercise their discretion transparently and accountably, while courts must subject every agreement to rigorous scrutiny. Furthermore, similar cases must receive similar treatment irrespective of the social status or political connections of the accused. Conclusively, institutional safeguards and robust judicial oversight must be put in place for plea bargaining to contribute to a criminal justice system that is not only efficient but also substantively just.