Disputable Issues of a Plea Agreement Conclusion

Abstract

The paper considers debatable issues that arise in the course of procedure under Ch. 40.1 of the Criminal effectiveness of the investigation of crimes that are difficult to prove. The main attention is given to the problem of determining the moment from which it is possible to conclude a plea agreement. According to the author, if the provision of information about the possibility of concluding such an agreement does not depend on the status of the person at the current moment of the proceedings (suspected or accused), then the very conclusion of a plea agreement should be possible only after the preliminary investigation conducted under the general rules and without any exceptions in the evidentiary activity and after justified charges are brought. At the same time, the charges brought against the person in the event of a plea agreement must remain unchanged. The author answers the question whether the confession of guilt by the accused is a prerequisite for concluding a plea agreement, or whether it is only necessary to obtain his consent with the prosecution, as provided for in Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. It is concludes that since the confession of guilt by the accused is an integral part of the consent with the charges, both an confession of guilt and an agreement with the accusation should be mandatory conditions of a plea agreement. A plea agreement is a deal between the prosecution and the defense, which must be concluded strictly after the charges are brought. It is necessary to amend the current structure of the criminal procedure rules by excluding such a potential participant in the conclusion of a plea agreement as a suspect from Ch. 40.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.