BY YUSUF SHEHU, mni                                Unfortunately our practice of plea bargain in the Nigerian context is either a total abuse of the procedure or an encouragement to public officers entrusted with public funds to loot as much they like or as much as they can and in the end settle mostly on their own terms, to part with an insignificant portion of the proceeds of the crime in the name of plea bargain.
It’s also a fact established by many cases in Nigeria that the other consequence of plea bargain to wit; a lighter punishment in exchange for a plea of guilt has also been grossly abused by those conferred with the powers to effect it.
There are cases abound where the plea bargains were concluded as a behind the door settlement between the accused and the investigators/ prosecutors without any criminal charges preferred against the looters who have confessed to the crime of corruption.
The impression created in the minds of the public is that the investigators/ prosecutors and managers of the plea bargain, enter into an unholy alliance to share the proceeds of the crime in agreed proportions and the accused is left off the hook. The looter is either not prosecuted or if there are pending charges filed against them, the prosecution would withdraw the charges on the ground of negotiated settlement.
This has been the way the plea bargain procedure has mostly been practiced in our jurisdiction and it leaves much to be desired.
I don’t think that it’s the intention of plea bargain to make the looter surrender an inconsequential portion of the looted funds to the government ( the handlers of the process) only to go scott free or apply another pittance from it to pay a meagre fine and enjoy the greater part of the loot for ever.
It must be appreciated that it’s a crime to loot and Justice in the case of a confessed looter, must entail the recovery of the entire sum of money or other properties involved in the crime, then in addition to serve a regime of punishment either by way or imprisonment or fine ( if you ask me, i would say both not either)
That’s Justice in recompense and a deterrence to others harbouring similar intentions to use their positions of trust to commit criminal breach of trust by looting public treasury without consequences for their criminal conduct.
The issue of cost enormous or not is not the important factor here. The crux is whether the expenses are incurred from the public treasury in the pursuit of Justice and as a deterrence from further looting of the treasury by others who would be encouraged to do so, if the only consequence is this warped and convoluted process of plea bargain
That also explains why in my opinion, public funds are expended in millions to track and bring to book, accused persons who stole only hundreds or thousands of Naira.
It’s public funds used to serve public purpose and it’s not a waste if the objective is achieved
As for the argument of uncertainty you raised, it is my opinion that most uncertainties in the outcome of prosecution of powerful or politically influential members of the Nigerian elite and the political class are contrived, premeditated and crafted to produce the predetermined outcome. It’s more due to corruption at all levels involved than incompetence or chance.
The plea bargain procedure in Nigeria is not approached with noble intention by those entrusted with the implementation of the process. It’s looked upon as an opportunity for those involved to take their own share and benefit from the proceeds of the crime.
I don’t think that in the US where we borrowed the plea bargain procedure, they apply it in the way and manner we do in our jurisdiction.
I can not be an advocate of the kind of plea bargain we introduced into our legal and judicial systems through the back door. We have reduced it to a bargain, settlement and trade in of corruption.
So far, I have not seen enough evidence from our practice to convince me to the contrary or to suggest that my thesis is predicated on a faulty foundation.