Introduction
Plea bargain is now an established feature of criminal justice administration in Nigeria. It allows a criminal case to be resolved through a negotiated arrangement between the prosecution and the defendant, rather than through the full process of a conventional trial.
But what exactly is a plea bargain?
Is it simply an agreement to end a criminal case? Is the prosecution bound by whatever is agreed with the defendant? Can the court reject the arrangement? And what exactly must a defendant do to benefit from a plea bargain?
The Supreme Court provided useful guidance on these questions in YAKUBU v. FRN (2022) LPELR-57749(SC), pp. 54-55, Paras. C-C.
What is a plea bargain?
In YAKUBU v. FRN (2022) LPELR-57749(SC), the Supreme Court considered the meaning of the expression “plea bargain” and referred to several authoritative definitions.
The Court reproduced the definition in Black’s Law Dictionary, Deluxe Ninth Edition, page 1270,as follows:
“A negotiated agreement between a prosecutor and a criminal defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offence or to one of multiple charges in exchange for some concession by the prosecutor, usually a more lenient sentence or a dismissal of the other charges”.
The Supreme Court also referred to Prof. Albert W. Alschuler, who defined plea bargain as:
“Plea bargain consists of the exchange of official concessions for a defendant’s act of self-conviction”.
The Court further referred to the Bouvier Law Dictionary, Compact Edition, page 812,which explains the concept in greater detail:
“(a) it is an agreement between a defendant and a prosecutor in respect of a charge pending or proposed to be brought against the defendant; (b) the defendant agrees to plead guilty to the charge with the expectation that: (i) he (the defendant) will be tried for a less serious charge than a more serious one; or (ii) he (the defendant) will receive a lower punishment than a harsher punishment; (c) the agreement is not binding on the Court until the Court accepts the plea and enters judgment based on it; (d) the Court has a discretion to refuse a plea bargain and order that the charge be tried.”
Per HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, JSC.
These definitions reveal the essential character of plea bargaining: it is a negotiated arrangement involving an accused person and the prosecution, in which the accused gives something, ordinarily a guilty plea, in exchange for a concession from the prosecution.
Plea bargain is more than an agreement to end a criminal case
One important point from the Supreme Court authorities is that plea bargain should not be confused with the mere withdrawal, amendment or termination of a criminal charge.
In PML (NIG) LTD v. FRN (2017) LPELR-43480(SC), pp. 30-33, Paras. B-D, the Supreme Court expressly rejected the suggestion that the essence of plea bargain is simply to bring a criminal proceeding to an end.
The Court stated:
“Obviously, the essence of Plea bargain is not just to conclude a trial. There must be a negotiated agreement between the Prosecution and the person accused of a crime, whereby the accused agrees to plead guilty to a lesser offence or to one of multiple charges in exchange for some concession by the Prosecution, which is usually in the form of a more lenient sentence or a dismissal of the other charges – see Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Ed.”
Per AMINA ADAMU AUGIE, JSC.
This distinction is important.
For example, where the prosecution withdraws a charge against an accused person, that fact alone does not necessarily establish that the accused entered into a plea bargain.
A plea bargain requires the element of negotiation and exchange.
What does the defendant give in a plea bargain?
The defendant’s part of the bargain ordinarily involves a guilty plea.
That guilty plea is fundamental because the concept is based on the defendant accepting criminal responsibility in return for a concession from the prosecution.
The concession may take different forms. Depending on the circumstances and applicable law, it may involve a reduction in the seriousness of the charge, the withdrawal of some charges, or an agreement concerning the sentence to be recommended.
This explains why the Supreme Court has emphasised that a plea bargain involves a conscious and deliberate act on the part of the accused.
The principle is therefore clear: a person claiming the benefit of a plea bargain must be able to establish his or her own participation in the arrangement.
What does the prosecution give in return?
The prosecution’s part of the bargain ordinarily consists of a concession.
The concession may include proceeding on a lesser offence, withdrawing some charges, or making an appropriate recommendation concerning punishment.
The prosecution’s concession is therefore the consideration for the defendant’s acceptance of responsibility.
It is this reciprocal character that distinguishes plea bargain from a unilateral decision by the prosecution to discontinue a case.
The Supreme Court’s description in YAKUBU v. FRN (supra) is particularly useful because it describes plea bargain as a negotiated agreement in which the defendant pleads guilty in exchange for a concession by the prosecutor.
Is a plea bargain automatically binding on the court?
No.
The fact that the prosecution and defendant have reached an agreement does not mean that the court simply becomes bound to accept whatever has been agreed.
This is one of the features specifically identified by the Supreme Court in YAKUBU v. FRN (supra) through the definition drawn from Bouvier Law Dictionary:
“(c) the agreement is not binding on the Court until the Court accepts the plea and enters judgment based on it; (d) the Court has a discretion to refuse a plea bargain and order that the charge be tried.”
This means that the court retains an important role in the process.
Plea bargaining does not remove the case from judicial control.
Plea bargain under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act
Plea bargaining is expressly recognised under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 (ACJA).
Section 270 of the Act provides the statutory framework for plea bargaining in proceedings to which the Act applies. The provision permits the prosecutor to receive and consider a plea bargain from a defendant charged with an offence, either directly from the defendant or on the defendant’s behalf, and also permits the prosecutor to offer a plea bargain to a defendant.
The statutory framework is significant because it moves plea bargaining beyond the idea of an informal settlement between parties. It establishes a recognised procedure within the criminal justice system.
The court consequently remains involved in the process.
Can the court impose a different sentence from the one agreed?
Yes, subject to the statutory safeguards governing plea bargaining.
The Court of Appeal explained the effect of section 270 in PEACE v. FRN (2021) LPELR-56410(CA), pp. 21-22, Paras. E-E.
The Court reproduced section 270(11) of the ACJA:
“(11) Where a defendant has been convicted under Subsection (9)(a), the presiding Judge or Magistrate shall consider the sentence as agreed upon and where he is: (a) satisfied that such sentence is an appropriate sentence, impose the sentence; (b) of the view that he would have imposed a lesser sentence than the sentence agreed, impose the lesser sentence; or (c) of the view that the offence requires a heavier sentence than the sentence agreed upon, he shall inform the defendant of such heavier sentence he considers to be appropriate.”
The Court also reproduced section 270(15):
“(15) Where the defendant has been informed of the heavier sentence as contemplated in subsection (11) (c) of this Section, the defendant may: (a) abide by his plea of guilty as agreed upon and agree that, subject to the defendant’s right to lead evidence and to present argument relevant to sentencing, the presiding Judge or Magistrate proceed with the sentencing; or (b) withdraw from his plea agreement, in which event the trial shall proceed de novo before another presiding Judge or Magistrate, as the case may be.”
Per MOORE ASEIMO ABRAHAM ADUMEIN, JCA.
Thus, even where the prosecution and defendant have agreed on a sentence, the court is not reduced to the role of merely endorsing the agreement.
The statutory scheme gives the court room to consider whether the agreed sentence is appropriate.
What are the advantages of plea bargain?
The Supreme Court identified several advantages of plea bargaining in YAKUBU v. FRN (supra).
The Court stated:
“The advantages of plea bargain include: (1) Accused can avoid the time and cost of defending himself at trial, the risk of harsher punishment, and the publicity the trial will involve. (2) The prosecution saves time and expense of a lengthy trial. (3) Both sides are spared the uncertainty of going to trial. (4) The Court system is saved the burden of conducting a trial on every crime charged.”
Per HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, JSC, YAKUBU v. FRN (2022) LPELR-57749(SC), pp. 55-57, Paras. D-B.
These advantages explain why plea bargaining has become an important tool in modern criminal justice administration.
For the defendant, it may provide certainty and reduce the risks associated with a full trial.
For the prosecution, it may avoid the time and expense involved in proving a case through a lengthy trial.
For the courts, it may reduce the burden created by a large volume of criminal cases.
But plea bargain is not supposed to defeat justice
The availability of these advantages does not mean that plea bargaining can be used without regard to the wider interests of justice.
The Supreme Court gave an important qualification in YAKUBU v. FRN (supra):
“It should be noted however that Plea Bargain should not be applied in a way that it will be perceived as a mockery of the criminal justice system. This is not the intendment of the principles of plea bargain. The application of plea bargaining should be in such a way that it will not defeat the attainment of substantial justice.”
The Court went further:
“Justice must flow in a three-way street in criminal matters. It must lead to justice to the defendant, the victim and the society.”
Per HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, JSC, YAKUBU v. FRN (2022) LPELR-57749(SC), pp. 55-57, Paras. D-B.
This is an important statement of principle.
Plea bargaining is not designed solely for the convenience of the prosecution or the accused. The criminal justice system must also consider the victim and the wider interests of society.
What are the essential features of a plea bargain?
The Nigerian authorities therefore point to several essential features.
1. There must be an agreement
Plea bargain involves a negotiated agreement between the prosecution and the defendant.
2. The defendant must give something in return
Ordinarily, this involves a guilty plea and consequential conviction.
3. The prosecution must provide a concession
The concession may relate to the charges or punishment, depending on the terms of the agreement and applicable law.
4. The defendant must personally participate
The Supreme Court has repeatedly described plea bargain as operating in personam.
5. The court must remain involved
The agreement does not become binding on the court merely because the prosecution and defendant have reached an agreement.
6. The arrangement must be consistent with substantial justice
Plea bargaining is intended to facilitate the administration of criminal justice, not to undermine it.
The difference between plea bargain and simply withdrawing a charge
This distinction deserves particular emphasis.
Suppose a prosecution withdraws a charge against an accused person without the accused pleading guilty or entering into a negotiated arrangement with the prosecution.
That does not, by itself, establish a plea bargain.
Likewise, the fact that a charge has been amended does not automatically mean that the accused has benefited from a plea bargain.
There must be evidence of the bargain itself and of the accused person’s participation in it.
Conclusion
Plea bargain is a negotiated process for resolving a criminal case, not simply an agreement to make a prosecution disappear.
Under the principles stated by the Supreme Court, it involves a conscious and deliberate arrangement between the prosecution and the accused, ordinarily involving a guilty plea in exchange for a prosecutorial concession.
The court remains an essential part of the process. The agreement is not automatically binding on the court, and the court must ensure that the resulting disposition is consistent with the law and the interests of justice.
Disclaimer:
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. The law may change, and readers should seek professional legal advice on specific circumstances.
If you found this helpful, please share it on social media — it only takes a click.