The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Criminal Justice

  • How to make Administration of Criminal Justice Act work

    How to make Administration of Criminal Justice Act work

    •Continued from last week

    The central criminal registry and database of criminal record

    There shall be established at the Nigeria Police Force a Central Criminal Records Registry and  at every state police command to which shall be transmitted all criminal records. All police commands shall ensure that the decisions of the courts in all criminal trials are transmitted to the Central Criminal Records Registry within 30 days of the judgment. The Attorney-General of the Federation shall establish an electronic and manual database of all records of arrests at the Federal and State levels.

     

    Detention pending trial

    A suspect arrested for an offence which a magistrate court has no jurisdiction to try shall, within a reasonable time of arrest, be brought before a magistrate court for remand.  An application for remand under this section shall be made ex parte and shall be returnable within 14 days…

     

    Control of prosecution of criminal cases

    Subject to the provision of section 174 of the Constitution, relating to the powers of prosecution by the Attorney-General of the Federation, prosecution of all offences in any court shall be undertaken by: (a) the Attorney-General of the Federation or a Law Officer in the Ministry or Department; (b) a legal practitioner authorised by the Attorney-General of the Federation; or (c) a legal practitioner authorised to prosecute by this Act or any other Act of the National Assembly. By this provision the prosecution of federal offences by police officers who are not legal practitioners is no longer permitted…

     

     Payment of costs, compensation damages and restitution to victims of crimes

    The Act has made provisions for costs, compensation, damages and restitution. A court may, within the proceedings or while passing judgment, order the defendant or convict to pay a sum of money: as compensation to any person injured by the offence, irrespective of any other fine or other punishment that may be imposed by law, where substantial compensation is in the opinion of the court recoverable by civil suit. In compensating a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of  the defect of the title in any property in respect of which the offence was committed and has been compelled to give it up; and in defraying expenses incurred on medical treatment of a victim injured by the convict in connection with the offence.

     

    Plea bargain

    Under the Act the prosecution may enter into plea bargain with the defendant, with the consent of the victim during or after the presentation of the evidence of the prosecution, but before the presentation of the evidence of the defence. Plea bargain may be allowed if the evidence of the prosecution is insufficient to prove the offence charged beyond reasonable doubt; where the defendant has agreed to return the proceeds of the crime or  make restitution to the victim or his representative; or where the defendant, in a case of conspiracy, has fully cooperated with the investigation and prosecution of the crime by providing relevant information for the successful prosecution of other offenders.

     

    Imprisonment and death sentence

    If a defendant is convicted the court shall impose the penalty prescribed by law for the offence depending on the circumstances of the case. Any convict who is sentenced to death may apply for prerogative of mercy. The Prerogative of Mercy Committee shall review the application and make appropriate recommendation to the President. If the plea for clemency  is rejected the sentence of death shall be executed by hanging the convict by the neck or by lethal injection. The Act has also made provisions for non-custodial alternatives including probation, parole, suspended sentence, performance of community service etc.

     Suspended sentence

    Where a defendant is charged before a court and the charge is proved the court  may decide not to convict  the defendant having regard to: (a) the character, antecedents, age, health, or mental condition of the defendant, (b) the trivial nature of the offence, or (c) the extenuating circumstances under which the offence was committed. In the circumstance, the court may  dismiss the charge or discharge the defendant conditionally on his entering into a recognizance to be of good behaviour and to appear at any time within 3 years as may be specified in the order.

    The court may, in addition, make order the defendant to pay  damages for injury or compensation to the victim of the crime and  such costs of the proceedings as the court thinks reasonable.

    Community service

    Notwithstanding the provision of any law creating an offence, where the court sees reason, the court may order that the sentence it imposed on the convict be, with or without conditions, suspended, in which case, the convict shall not be required to serve the sentence in accordance with the conditions of the suspension. The court may, with or without conditions, sentence the convict to perform specified service in his/her community or such community or place as the court may direct.

    A convict shall not be sentenced to suspended sentence or to community service for an offence involving the use of arms, offensive weapon, sexual offences or for an offence which the punishment exceeds imprisonment for a term of 3 years. ParoleWhere the Comptroller-General of Prisons recommends to the court that a prisoner: (a) sentenced and serving sentence in prison is of good behaviour, and  (b) has served at least one-third of the prison term of at least 15 years or life imprisonment, the court may, after hearing the prosecution and the prisoner or legal representative, order that the remaining term of the imprisonment be suspended, with or without conditions, as the court considers fit, and the prisoner shall be released from prison on the order. A prisoner who is so released  shall undergo a rehabilitation programme in a government facility or any other appropriate facility to enable him to be properly reintegrated to the society.

    Conclusion

    No doubt, the AJCA is a timely intervention in the criminal justice sector in Nigeria. If implemented the Act will  redeem the criminal justice from the tiny grip of rich and powerful criminal suspects and assist the anti graft agencies in the prosecution of corruption cases. But it is doubtful if the implementation of the new law will not be frustrated by the forces that have made a mockery of  section 36 of the Constitution, section 40 of the EFCC Act and the 2013 practice directions  of the federal courts which provide for the expeditious trial of criminal cases.

    The Federal Government which is desirous to prosecute cases of economic and financial crimes should take advantage of the provisions of the AJCA.In particular,  the federal government should provide adequate funding for the criminal justice sector.

    Setting up and maintaining a central criminal records registry, rehabilitation centre for ex-convicts, compiling  electronic and manual database of criminal records  and video-recording of the statements of criminal suspects, visiting of detention facilities by magistrates and judges  require etc sufficient funding.

    The Administration of Justice Monitoring Committee should be encouraged to conduct enlightenment programmes for members of the Nigeria Police Force  and other law enforcement agencies on the basic rights of suspects guaranteed by the law. From time to time, the human rights community and the media should promote civic education with respect to the relevant provisions of the AJCA.

    They should ensure that the rights of suspects in detention facilities and prison inmates are recognised and respected by the police and other law enforcement agencies.  Apart from the Lagos, Ekiti and Anambra states which have amended their criminal procedure laws before the federal government, other state governments are enjoined to adopt the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. Such adoption will ensure uniformity in the criminal justice system in the country.

    •Concluded.

  • ‘Strengthen criminal justice systems against illicit drug traffickers’

    ‘Strengthen criminal justice systems against illicit drug traffickers’

    To fight the production, trafficking and use of illicit drugs, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has called for the strengthening of criminal justice systems. It unveiled the National Drug Control Master Plan (NDCMP) in Abuja, Evelyn Osagie reports.

    •UNODC unveils Drug Control Master Plan

    Worried by the danger posed by the production, trafficking and use of illicit drugs, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) is leading a campaign titled: “Let’s develop our lives, our communities, our identities without drugs.”

    With nearly 200,000 drug-related deaths and 1.65 million infected with HIV in 2013, it is calling for the prevalence of science and evidence-based practices in the delivery of prevention and treatment of drug use.

    Against this backdrop, UNODC Country Representative Mr Koli Kouame has called for sustained concerted efforts in the war against drugs and related organised crimes in Nigeria, noting that access to evidence based prevention and treatment can sometimes be the difference between life and death. He added that these approaches are the foundation for all our efforts.

    “Robust action is needed to strengthen criminal justice systems, break-up the criminal networks who deal in misery and suffering, and to nurture health and human rights-based responses.

    “At present, only one in six people who use drugs globally has access to treatment. Women face numerous barriers to treatment–while one in three drug users globally are women, only one in five drug users in treatment are women.

    Africa, particularly West and East Africa, also remains vulnerable to the trafficking and the consumption of illicit drugs,” he said.

    These trends, he noted, are part of organised crime’s attack on the security, health and development of an already-fragile region, saying; “The nexus of organised crime and terrorism—including the apparent role of drug trafficking—is a serious threat”.

    To commemorate this year’s International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, the agency unveiled the National Drug Control Master Plan, 2015 to 2019 in Abuja. It had in attendance the Chairman of NDLEA, Alhaji Ahmadu Giade, the Programme Management, Polleak OK Seei, who represented UNODC Country Representative, among others.

    This year’s commemoration was peculiar because, according to Kouame, it coincided with the official unveiling of Nigeria’s National Drug Control Master Plan (NDCMP), “the formulation of which was supported by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) under the framework of a European-Union funded project, Response to Drugs and Related Organised Crime in Nigeria”. The unveiling, according to him, will officially signify the commencement of its implementation by the relevant stakeholders including ministries departments and agencies of government, faith-based organisations, educational and professional institutions, and civil society organisations.

    Kouame said: “The Master Plan was endorsed last May 22 by the former President Goodluck Jonathan. UNODC is particularly proud to be associated with the formulation of the Master Plan which was led by the Inter-Ministerial Drug Control Committee of Nigeria. As we congratulate the government and people of Nigeria for this important achievement, we use the opportunity of the global focus on the drug problem to reiterate the call for sustained concerted efforts in the war against drugs and related organised crime in Nigeria.

    “The launch of the Master Plan would not have been possible without the invaluable support of the European Union which has fully funded not only its formulation but remains committed to supporting its implementation in partnership with the government of Nigeria over the next five years.”

    NDCMP, he said, outlines activities that will help reduce the incidences of illicit cultivation, production, use, and trafficking of narcotic substances under four main pillars, which include law enforcement, drug demand reduction, access and control of narcotics and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes, and coordination.

    “The Master Plan provides an integrated and comprehensive roadmap for multi-sectoral interventions to address a wide array of drug related issues in Nigeria, in line with international drug control conventions. It outlines activities that will help reduce significantly the incidences of illicit cultivation, production, use, and trafficking of narcotic substances in Nigeria and indeed the sub-region,” Mr Kouame said.

  • Innovative provisions of Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015

    Innovative provisions of Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015

     

    Introduction

    Criminal procedure in Nigeria is governed by two principal legislations which were handed down to us by the British Colonial Administration, namely:  the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA)1 and the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC)2. Each state in Nigeria has either adopted the CPA or the CPC. These laws have been applied for many decades without significant improvement. As a result, the criminal justice system has lost its capacity to respond quickly to the needs of the society to check the rising waves of crime, speedily bring  criminals to book and protect the victims of crime. The ACJA2015 responds to Nigeria’s dire need of a new legislation that will transform the criminal justice system to reflect the true intents of the Constitution and the demands of a democratic society, eliminate unacceptable delays in disposing of criminal cases and improve the efficiency of criminal justice administration in the country. Indeed the Buhari Administration should urgently commence the implementation of the ACJA to prosecute its campaign against corruption and allied crimes.

    The provisions for the reform of Administration of Criminal Justice were first developed in 2005 by the National Working Group on the Reform of Criminal Justice in Nigeria.  The Group which was established by the then Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation  Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN was maintained by his successor, Chief BayoOjo, SAN. The Group consisted of individuals drawn from all segments of the criminal justice sector. The  immediate Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke, SAN upon assumption established the Panel on Implementation of Justice Reform (PIJR) in 2011to implement the proposals for reform produced by the National Working Group under the earlier administrations. The Panel conducted a detailed review of the proposals, brought them up-to-date and adopted an improved version.

    The ACJ proposals merged the provisions of the two principal legislations, CPA and CPC into one principal federal Act which is intended to apply uniformly in all federal courts across the entire Federation. Substantially, it preserves the existing criminal procedures. But it introduces new innovative provisions that will enhance the efficiency of the justice system. In other words the ACJA 2015 builds upon the existing framework of criminal justice administration in the country. However, it fills the gaps observed in these laws over the course of several decades. The contents as revised and updated by the Panel on Implementation of Justice Reform (PIJR), with the support of the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies have now been enacted into law.  The House of Representatives have turned the proposals to a Act and passed them wholly into law.

     

     Purposes of the Act

    The main purposes of the ACJ Act (ACJA) 2015 include the following: To promote efficient management of criminal justice institutions and speedy dispensation of justice, protect the society from crime, and Protect the rights and the interest of the defendant and the victim. The purposes of the ACJ Act are captured in section 1 of the Act. These indicate a deliberate shift from punishment as the main goal of the criminal justice to restorative justice which pays attention to the needs of the society, the victims, vulnerable persons and human dignity.

    The general provisions of the ACJ Act apply to criminal trial in court except where express provision is made in the Act or in any other law in respect of any particular court or form of trial. Specifically, section 2 of the Act provides that its provision shall not apply to a Court Martial.

     

    Unlawful Arrests

    Unlawful arrest is one of the major problems of our criminal process and it is one of the reasons why police stations and prisons are overcrowded. Arrests are sometimes made on allegation that are purely civil in nature or on a frivolous ground. By section 10(1) of the CPA, the police could arrest without a warrant, any person who has no ostensible means of sustenance and who cannot give a satisfactory account of himself. This particular provision has been greatly abused by the police who use it as a ground to arrest people indiscriminately. The ACJ Act has deleted this provision.

    There have been several instances where the police arrested relations or friends and close associate of a crime suspect to compel the suspect to give himself up even though that person is not linked in any way to the crime the suspect is being accused of. Section 7 of the ACJ Act specifically prohibits arrest in lieu.

    Apart from the police, other agencies vested with power of arrest e.g. the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), etc had abused this power to arrest and detain relatives and close associates of criminal suspect in lieu of the suspects where they had challenges in apprehending the suspects. Section 7 should curtail this kind of abuses.

     

    Notification of cause of arrest

    Sections 5 of the CPA and 38 of the CPC provide that a police officer or a person making an arrest is to inform the arrested person of the reason for the arrest, except where he is being arrested in course of the commission of the offence or is pursued immediately after the commission of the offence or escaped from lawful custody. It has been argued that this provision falls short of the contemporary requirement3. The ACJ Act 2015 retains this provision in section 6.  However there is a proviso which mandates the police officer or any other person to inform the suspect of his right to:  (a) remain silent or avoid answering any question until after consultation with a legal practitioner or any other person of his own choice; (b) consult a legal practitioner of his choice before making, endorsing or writing any statement or answering any question put to him after arrest; (c) free legal representation by the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria where applicable.

    This provision re-affirms section 35(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which provides that any person who is arrested or detained shall have the right to remain silent or answering any question until after consultation with a legal practitioner  or any other person of his choice.

    It is necessary to state here that the proviso in section 6 (2) is quite laudable since the suspect will have the benefit of not only being informed of the offence he has committed but also an additional advantage of counsel assisting in securing his immediate release on bail and ensuring that trial is expeditious. This would in turn prevent prolonged detention of suspects and hopefully bring about decongestion of the prisons.

     

    Humane treatment of an arrested Person and prohibition of arrest on civil cases

    The ACJ Act 2015 reiterated the human right constitutional provision of the right to dignity of person. Section 8(1) of the Act provides that:  a suspect shall- (a)     be accorded humane treatment, having regard to his right to the dignity of his person. (b)               Not be subjected to any form of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

    Section 8 (2) deals with the longstanding problem whereby people employ the machinery of criminal justice wrongly for civil matters. It is not uncommon for people to maliciously instigate the arrest and detention of others for a breach of contract, failure to pay debt owed or for other civil wrongs. This provision that “a suspect shall not be arrested merely on a civil wrong or breach of contract.” is a laudable one. It is believed that it would check arbitrary arrest of persons and torture by law enforcement and security agencies.

     

    Mandatory Inventory of Property

    In order to encourage accountability and transparency, the ACJ Act introduced in section 10 a provision which states that a police officer making an arrest or to whom a private person hands over a suspect, shall take an inventory of all items or properties recovered from the suspect. The inventory must be duly signed by the police officer and the suspect. However, where the suspect refuses to sign, it shall not invalidate the inventory. This provision also directs that a copy of the inventory shall be given to the suspect, his legal practitioner, or such other person as the suspect may direct.

    This provision permits the police to release such property upon request by either the owner of the property or parties having interest in the property pending the arraignment of the suspect before a Court. Where a police officer refuses to release the property to the owner or any person having interest in the property, the police officer shall make a report to the court of the fact of the property taken from the arrested suspect and the particulars of the property.

    It is now entirely for the court to decide whether to release the property or any portion of it in the interest of justice to the safe custody of the owner or person having interest in the property. This provision further provides that where any property has been taken from a suspect in section 10 of the ACJ Act, and the suspect is not charged before a court but is released on the ground that there is no sufficient reason to believe that he has committed an offence, any property taken from the suspect shall be returned to him, provided the property is neither connected to nor a proceed of crime.

     

     Recording of Arrest

    The ACJ Act makes provisions for mandatory record of personal data of an arrested Person. This is contained in section 15 of the Act. Such personal data of the arrested person shall include:

    (a)        the alleged offence(s);

    (b)        the date and circumstances of the arrest;

    (c)        name, occupation and residential address of the suspect; and

    (d)        the suspect’s identification which include his height, photograph, fingerprint impressions, or such other means of identification.

    Subsection 2 of section 15, further provides that the process of recording shall be concluded within a reasonable time, not exceeding forty-eight hours.  This is intended to check prolong pre-trial detention in the guise of recording the personal data of the arrested person.

     

    Establishment of a Police Central Criminal Registry

    Section 16(1) of the ACJ Act makes provision for the establishment, within the Nigeria Police, a Central Criminal Record Registry. Subsection 2 of section 16 provides that there shall be established at every state police command, a Criminal Records Registry which shall keep and transmit all such records to the Central Criminal Records Registry.

    Subsection 3 mandates the Chief Registrar of the courts to transmit the decisions of the court in all criminal trials to the Central Criminal Records Registry within thirty-days after delivery of judgment. Where there is default by the Chief Registrar to transmit records within thirty days after judgment, he shall be liable to disciplinary measures by the Federal Judicial Service Commission for misconduct.

    The establishment of Central Criminal Record Registry will ensure that all arrests and judgments are well documented. This is intended to avoid a repeat of what happened in the case of Agbi v. Ibori4. The central figure in this case was Chief James OnanefeIbori, the then Governor of Delta State. At the time of commencement of this action at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja he was a candidate for the 2003 general elections. In an action before the said High Court two persons suing as Plaintiffs began a joint action to challenge Ibori’s qualification to stand as a gubernatorial candidate for the 2003 election having been an ex-convict. The action did not succeed before the High Court, however on appeal to the Court of Appeal, the Court in a unanimous judgment allowed the appeal of the Plaintiffs, set aside the judgment of the High Court and ordered that the case be heard afresh by another Judge of the High Court.

    The proceedings commenced at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and one of the main issues was whether the record of proceedings of Bwari Upper Area Court in case N0. CK 81-95 (Exhibit A) wherein one James OnanfeIbori was convicted was sufficient to act against the 5th Defendant/Appellant (James OnanfeIbori) as an ex-convict. During the trial the Area Court Judge came to court and testified that James OnanfeIbori was an ex-convict. James OnanfeIbori on the other hand, contented that Exhibit A did not conform to section 157 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court gave judgment in favour of James OnanfeIbori and the matter was dismissed.

    With the new provision in the ACJ Act, cases like this would no longer pose a major problem as there would be sufficient information on all convicted persons which would make it easy to identify them in subsequent proceedings.

     

       Electronic recording of confessional statement

    Section 15(4) of the Act provides that where a person arrested with or without a warrant of arrest volunteers to make a confessional statement, the police officer shall record the statement in writing or may record the making of the confessional statement electronically on a retrievable video compact disc or such other audio visual means. Subsection (5) of section 15 provides that notwithstanding the provision of subsection (4), an oral confession of arrested suspect shall be admissible in evidence. This provision of the ACJ Act conforms to the position of the law as contained in the Evidence Act.

  • Plea bargain and Nigeria’s Criminal Justice Administration

    Plea bargain and Nigeria’s Criminal Justice Administration

    Until recently, most Nigerians were not familiar with the legal term “plea bargain’’ as it was not part of Nigeria’s history.

    Plea bargain is a process whereby a criminal defendant and the prosecutor reach a mutually satisfactory disposition.

    The term became known and applied with the establishment of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) following increased level of corruption.

    The judiciary then began to apply the process in justice administration particularly in high profile cases prosecuted by the EFCC.

    Some cases so far resolved through plea bargain include the case of misuse of depositors’ funds preferred against a former Chief Executive Officer of the Oceanic Bank, Mrs Cecelia Ibru.

    The prosecution and the defence agreed under plea bargain that Mrs. Ibru should forfeit 199 assets and funds worth about N190 billion and be sentenced to only six months’ imprisonment.

    Also, the money laundering case against former former Bayelsa State Diepriye Alamieseiya was disposed of through plea bargain which required him to forfeit some assets and to escape stiff penalty.

    Former Governor Lucky Igbinedion of Edo State also had his money-laundering case determined through plea bargain.

    Many Nigerians, including lawyers, have criticised the application of this process in the nation’s legal system. Some argue that plea bargain is not part of Nigeria’s history and others say that its application will fuel corruption since it allows less punishment for corrupt people.

    The immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Dahiru Musdapher, is a major critic of plea bargain which, he describes, as dubious.

    He said: “The concept is not only dubious but was never part of the history of our legal system — at least until it was surreptitiously smuggled into our statutory laws with the creation of the EFCC.”

    Musdapher made the submission at an Alternative Dispute Resolution summit organised by the Negotiation and Conflict Management Group and the National Judicial Institute.

    An eminent lawyer and university lecturer, Prof. Adedokun Adeyemi, explains that plea bargain was not specifically provided for under any Nigerian federal legislation, and that the nearest to plea bargain was Section 14(2) of the EFCC Act.

    He accused the EFCC of employing the section to make defendants to make restitution in derogation of Section 29 (2) of the Evidence Act.

    According to the don, the Evidence Act provided that confessions are inadmissible if obtained by oppression, but that the EFCC has been employing Section 14(2) of its Act to persuade defendants to make restitution “with promises made by the commission’s agents’’.

    The section, Prof Adeyemi argued, empowers the commission to compound any offence punishable under the Act, by accepting money as it deems it, notwithstanding the amount to which the accused would have been liable if convicted.

    He said: “Before resorting to plea bargain, there must be voluntariness on the part of the person willing to plea bargain; this willingness must be backed by a court approval.’’

    Adeyemi noted that the concept is being abused in Nigeria’s criminal jurisprudence.

    He, however, notes that plea bargain expedites the conclusion of the criminal process without the need for a formal trial, thereby reducing congestion of the cause lists of courts.

    The professor said that plea bargain reduces cost of prosecution, noting that in the United States (U.S.), more than 90 per cent of criminal cases was being settled through plea bargain.

    A social critic and lawyer, Mr Bamidele Aturu, described plea bargaining as an embarrassment to Nigeria’s judicial system.

    He said the concept encourages people who unlawfully enriched themselves with public funds to escape long sentences, giving the impression that only the poor will serve the long-term punishment under the law.

    Aturu said: “It leads to corruption, and corruption has reduced our moral values.”

    Another lawyer, Mr Spurgeon Ataene, also argued that plea bargain favours only the rich and influential, adding that it has caused some controversies in the judicial system “because those who looted public funds don’t want to be punished’’.

    He advocated that the concept should also be applied in cases involving the poor so that they can take its advantage.

    Another SAN, Mr Vincent Ohaneri, described plea bargain as a well thought-out initiative but would not thrive in Nigeria’s political, judicial and socio-economic milieu.

    According to him, the concept will not augur well in because most political “big wigs” have seized the opportunity of plea bargain get away with serious offences that required criminal prosecution.

    He said: “A handful of our elites in the country have used plea bargain to run away from just punishment for criminal acts.

    “The concept should be completely abrogated from our judicial system. I say this because Nigeria as a nation is already faced with too many cases of corruption and financial malpractice.

    “These culprits should be made to face the wrath of the law, rather than romancing with them in the name of plea bargain.

    Mr. Mike Agbamuche, a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, has belief plea bargain enables individuals to get away with their wrong doings.

    He said that financially-enhanced individuals, who enter into plea bargain, do not feel the brunt of punishment because they merely refunded a specified amount. ‘

    Agbamuche said: “I do not see the justice in plea bargain as that is a door left open for abuse.

    “When a crime is committed against a society, there should be deterring punishments, and to my mind, plea bargain is not one of such deterrents.’’

    He, therefore urged abolition of the practice.

    Mr Onyekachi Ubani, the Ikeja branch Chairman of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja branch, also describes plea bargain as unhealthy to the judicial system.

    “The manner and mode of application of plea bargain is questionable,”Ubani argued, adding that the process is clearly a recipe for impunity in corruption cases.

    However, Mr Chris Uche, (SAN), viewed the system from a different perspective, as according to him, plea bargain is a good initiative since it quickens disposal of cases.

    The senior advocate said: “Plea bargain is a good concept in criminal prosecution, which has been successfully experimented abroad.

    “But like every other thing in Nigeria, the concept is abused, particularly when utilised in prosecution of criminal cases.’’

    Also Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), said that the advantages of plea bargain surpasses its disadvantages because it makes room for conviction, sentence or sanction with resources saved.

    “As long as it is carried out in an honest manner— without any underhand arrangements— it has more of advantages than disadvantages,” Sagay argued.

    Mr Emmanuel Oche Ochai, also a lawyer, agreed that plea bargain, though new to Nigeria’s legal system, saves the time and cost of litigation.

    Ochai expressed satisfaction that the process requires the defendant to pay part of his loot and get less punishment.

    He said where the law provides for maximum sentence, the judge has discretion to give the minimum sentence. Ochai says.

    The Chairman of the EFCC, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, is satisfied that the EFCC has been able to use plea bargain to conclude some high profile cases.

    He lists the cases to include those involving former Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Alhaji Tafa Balogun; Alamieyeseigha, Igbinedion and Mrs. Ibru.