The Extent of Voluntariness in Plea Bargaining for Economic and Financial Crimes in Nigeria

Abstract

The concept of plea bargaining has globally been recognised and applied in criminal trials so as to enable the accused person to have lighter punishment or to be charge with a lesser offence in a criminal court, while the prosecutor on the other hand will secure conviction. Plea bargaining accommodates the consensual agreement between an accused person and the prosecutor in respect of the case against the accused which is subject to court’s approval or acceptance. In Nigeria, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is empowered by law to compound offences and to dispose financial and other related offences against the accused persons. Hence, EFCC uses its discretion to apply plea bargaining to some of the cases it prosecutes with the aim of securing conviction and to recover the illegally acquired property from the accused. In the case of Dieprieye Alamiesiegha, after an agreement was reached between him and the prosecutor (EFCC), instead of him pleading guilty as required by law in Nigeria, he explained the reasons why he pleaded guilty. This article examines the cases of plea bargaining in Nigeria and analyses whether or not the admission of guilt by the accused is voluntarily made or is motivated and influenced by some extraneous factors. This article finds that based on the cases analysed, the acceptance of plea bargaining in Nigeria by the accused persons as applied by the EFCC were not made freely and voluntarily as required by the law and best practices in other jurisdictions. This is because the accused persons were forced into it by some certain extraneous factors that were initiated and proffered by the EFCC against provision of the law.