The plea agreement - a new way of negotiated justice in the european judiciaries

• Author: Liviu-Alexandru Lascu
• Position: Faculty of Law, Agora University of Oradea, Romania
• Pages: 66-77

AGORA International Journal of Juridical Sciences, http://univagora.ro/jour/index.php/aijjs

ISSN 1843-570X, E-ISSN 2067-7677

No. 2 (2019), pp. 66 - 77

66

THE PLEA AGREEMENT – A NEW WAY OF NEGOTIATED

JUSTICE IN THE EUROPEAN JUDICIARIES

L.A. LASCU

Liviu-Alexandru LASCU

Faculty of Law, Agora University of Oradea, Romania

Correspondence: Liviu-Alexandru Lascu, Agora University, 8 Piaţa Tineretului St., Oradea,

Romania,

E-mail: liviu.lascu@univagora.ro

ABSTRACT:

The aim of this article is to emphasize the main features of the Plea Agreement

procedure in the European traditional systems, common law and civil law, as well as the

features of this concept as it has been implemented into the proceedings of some European

countries and, accordingly, to analyse the reasons for which, the expertise of these already

implemented procedures might be a pathway to solve many shortcomings of the national

jurisdictions.

KEY WORDS: plea agreement, plea bargaining, guilty plea, negotiated justice, ad-

hoc tribunals, adversarial, inquisitorial, common law, civil law.

1.INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

The Plea Agreementis a criminal proceeding arising from the Anglo - American

judiciaries and consists in the fact that both the prosecutor and the Defense, taking into

account the specific circumstances of the case, reach a mutually beneficial agreement.

According to this agreement, the defendant accepts a self-incrimination while the prosecutor

ensures a more convenient penalty than that the defendant would expect, if found guilty at the

final judgment. Subsequently, this agreement must be approved by the court, thus relieving

the judicial authorities to conducting adjudicative judgment according to the classical

procedure. In such proceedings, in exchange for the defendant’s admission of the alleged

facts, depending on the jurisdiction to which we refer, the prosecutor have some different

bargaining tools: he may waive some charges in exchange for the defendant’s admission of

committing others; he may offer a reduced penalty; he may offer lighter modes or less

coercive forms of penalty enforcement; he can guarantee a range of benefits within the

witness protection programs in exchange of the defendant’s self incrimination and further

cooperation for the prosecution of other criminals.

It is not completely random why this special procedure appeared in the criminal

jurisprudence of the Common Law states, also known as the adversarial judicial systems.

Here, the State, represented by the prosecutor, is only a part within the criminal process,

sharing exactly the same statute like the defendant and the pattern of the process appears to be

very similar to that of a civil process. In addition to this aspect, the adversarial systems

traditionally provided significant procedural rights and safeguards for defendant while the