Editing Plea bargain (section)

==Use in civil law countries==
Plea bargaining is extremely difficult in jurisdictions based on the [[Civil law (legal system)|civil law]]. This is because, unlike [[common law]] systems, civil law systems have no concept of [[plea]]: if the defendant confesses, a confession is entered into evidence, but the prosecution is not absolved of the duty to present a full case. A court may decide that a defendant is innocent even though they presented a full confession. Also, unlike common law systems, prosecutors in civil law countries may have limited or no power to drop or reduce charges after a case has been filed, and in some countries their power to drop or reduce charges ''before'' a case has been filed is limited, making plea bargaining impossible. Since the 1980s, some civil law nations have adapted their systems to allow for plea bargaining.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Turner|first1=Jenia Iontcheva|title=Plea Bargaining and International Criminal Justice|journal=The University of the Pacific Law Review|date=2017|volume=48|issue=2|pages=219–246|url=http://www.mcgeorge.edu/Documents/Publications/turner_TUOPLR472.pdf|access-date=28 June 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170905231841/http://www.mcgeorge.edu/Documents/Publications/turner_TUOPLR472.pdf|archive-date=5 September 2017}}</ref>

===Brazil===
In 2013 Brazil passed a law allowing plea bargains, which have been used in the political corruption trials taking place since then.<ref>{{cite web|title=Brazil|url=https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-role-plea-bargains-the-fight-against-corruption-presentation-brazils-attorney-general|access-date=5 March 2018|date=17 July 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180306040215/https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-role-plea-bargains-the-fight-against-corruption-presentation-brazils-attorney-general|archive-date=6 March 2018}}</ref>

===Central African Republic===
In the [[Central African Republic]], [[witchcraft]] carries heavy penalties but those accused of it typically confess in exchange for a modest sentence.<ref>{{cite magazine|last1=Wood|first1=Graeme|title=Hex Appeal|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/06/hex-appeal/308103/|access-date=28 June 2017|magazine=The Atlantic|date=June 2010|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170609013424/https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/06/hex-appeal/308103/|archive-date=9 June 2017}}</ref>

===China===
In China, a plea bargaining [[pilot scheme]] was introduced by the [[Standing Committee of the National People's Congress]] in 2016.<ref>{{cite news|title=China passes pilot program for plea bargains|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-courts-plea-bargains/china-passes-pilot-program-for-plea-bargains-idUSKCN11904W?il=0|newspaper=Reuters|access-date=20 January 2018|date=3 September 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180220152447/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-courts-plea-bargains/china-passes-pilot-program-for-plea-bargains-idUSKCN11904W?il=0|archive-date=20 February 2018}}</ref> For defendants that face jail terms of three years or fewer, agrees to plead guilty voluntarily and agree with prosecutors' crime and sentencing proposals are given mitigated punishments.<ref>{{cite web|title=China Focus: China considers plea bargaining in criminal cases|url=http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-08/29/c_135642723.htm|website=Xinhua|access-date=20 January 2018|date=8 September 2016|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180220152327/http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-08/29/c_135642723.htm|archive-date=20 February 2018}}</ref>

===Denmark===
In 2009, in a case about whether witness testimony originating from a plea deal in the United States was admissible in a Danish criminal trial ''(297/2008 H)'', the [[Supreme Court (Denmark)|Supreme Court of Denmark]] (Danish: Højesteret) unanimously ruled that plea bargains are ''[[prima facie]]'' not legal under Danish law,<ref name="DSC">{{cite press release |url=http://www.hoejesteret.dk/hoejesteret/nyheder/pressemeddelelser/Pages/Pleabargain.aspx |title=Plea bargain |language=da |author=Supreme Court of Denmark |publisher=[[Danish Court Administration]] |date=2009-01-09 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131118050212/http://www.hoejesteret.dk/hoejesteret/nyheder/pressemeddelelser/Pages/Pleabargain.aspx |archive-date=2013-11-18 }}</ref> but that the witnesses in the particular case would be allowed to testify regardless (with the caveat that the lower court consider the possibility that the testimony was untrue or at least influenced by the benefits of the plea bargain).<ref name="DSC" /> The Supreme Court did, however, point out that Danish law contains mechanisms similar to plea bargains, such as {{nowrap|§ 82, nr. 10}} of the [[Danish Penal Code]] (Danish: ''Straffeloven'') which states that a sentence may be reduced if the perpetrator of a crime provides information that helps solve a crime perpetrated by others,<ref name="danishpenalcode">{{cite web |url=https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=181992 |title=Straffeloven |language=da |trans-title=The Penal Code |author=Department of Civil Affairs |work=Retsinformation |publisher=[[Ministry of Justice (Denmark)|Danish Ministry of Justice]] |date=2016-07-05 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170123175441/https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=181992 |archive-date=2017-01-23 }}</ref><ref name="DSC" /> or {{nowrap|§ 23 a}} of the [[Danish Competition Law]] (Danish: ''Konkurrenceloven'') which states that someone can apply to avoid being fined or prosecuted for participating in a [[cartel]] if they provide information about the cartel that the authorities did not know at the time.<ref name="danishcompetitionlaw">{{cite web |url=https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=173097 |title=Konkurrenceloven |language=da |trans-title=The Competition Law |author=Department of Civil Affairs |work=Retsinformation |publisher=[[Ministry of Justice (Denmark)|Danish Ministry of Justice]] |date=2015-07-10 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923180019/https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=173097 |archive-date=2015-09-23 }}</ref><ref name="DSC" />

If a defendant admits to having committed a crime, the prosecution does not have to file charges against them, and the case can be heard as a so-called "admission case" (Danish: ''tilståelsessag'') under {{nowrap|§ 831}} of the [[Administration of Justice Act (Denmark)|Law on the Administration of Justice]] (Danish: ''Retsplejeloven'') provided that: the confession is supported by other pieces of evidence (meaning that a confession is not enough to convict someone on its own); both the defendant and the prosecutor consent to it; the court does not have any objections; §§ 68, 69, 70 and 73 of the penal code do not apply to the case.{{Efn|These sections relate to sentencing of intellectually disabled and mentally ill individuals, as well as indefinite imprisonment.<ref name="danishpenalcode" />}}<ref name="DKADMJUSTICE">{{cite web |url=https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=183537 |title=Retsplejeloven |language=da |trans-title=Law on the Administration of Justice |author=Department of Civil Affairs |work=Retsinformation |publisher=[[Ministry of Justice (Denmark)|Danish Ministry of Justice]] |date=2016-10-28 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170411054831/https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=183537 |archive-date=2017-04-11 }}</ref>

===France===
The introduction of a limited form of plea bargaining (''comparution sur reconnaissance préalable de culpabilité'' or CRPC, often summarized as ''plaider coupable'') in 2004 was highly controversial in France. In this system, the public prosecutor could propose to suspects of relatively minor crimes a penalty not exceeding one year in prison; the deal, if accepted, had to be accepted by a judge. Opponents, usually lawyers and [[leftist]] political parties, argued that plea bargaining would greatly infringe on the rights of defense, the long-standing constitutional right of [[presumption of innocence]], the rights of suspects in police custody, and the [[right to a fair trial]].

For instance, [[Robert Badinter]] argued that plea bargaining would give too much power to the public prosecutor and would encourage defendants to accept a sentence only to avoid the risk of a bigger sentence in a trial, even if they did not really deserve it. Only a minority of criminal cases are settled by that method: in 2009, 77,500 out of the 673,700 or 11.5% of the decisions by the correctional courts.<ref>{{cite web|title=Les chiffres-clés de la Justice|url=http://www.justice.gouv.fr/art_pix/1_chiffrescles06.pdf|publisher=Ministére de la Justice|date=October 2016|access-date=28 June 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171019183344/http://www.justice.gouv.fr/art_pix/1_chiffrescles06.pdf|archive-date=19 October 2017}}</ref>

===Georgia===
Plea bargaining (Georgian: საპროცესო შეთანხმება, literally "plea agreement") was introduced in Georgia in 2004. The substance of the Georgian plea bargaining is similar to the United States and other common law jurisdictions.<ref>{{cite web|title=Plea Bargaining Institute in Georgia|url=http://www.justice.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=ENG&sec_id=672&info_id=3605|website=Ministry of Justice of Georgia|access-date=28 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120118061753/http://www.justice.gov.ge/index.php?lang_id=ENG&sec_id=672&info_id=3605|archive-date=18 January 2012}}</ref>

A plea bargaining, also called a plea agreement or negotiated plea, is an alternative and consensual way of criminal case settlement. A plea agreement means settlement of case without main hearing when the defendant agrees to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser charge or for a more lenient sentence or for dismissal of certain related charges. (Article 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)

====Defendants' rights during plea bargaining====

The main principle of the plea bargaining is that it must be based on the free will of the defendant, equality of the parties and advanced protection of the rights of the defendant:
 
* In order to avoid fraud of the defendant or insufficient consideration of his or her interests, legislation foresees obligatory participation of the defense council; (Article 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)
* The defendant has the right to reject the plea agreement on any stage of the criminal proceedings before the court renders the judgment. (Article 213 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)
* In case of refusal, it is prohibited to use information provided by the defendant under the plea agreement against him or her in the future. (Article 214 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)
* The defendant has the right to appeal the judgment rendered consequent to the plea agreement if the plea agreement was concluded by deception, coercion, violence, threat, or violence. (Article 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)

====Obligations of the prosecutor while concluding the plea agreement====

While concluding the plea agreement, the prosecutor is obliged to take into consideration public interest, severity of the penalty, and personal characteristics of the defendant. (Article 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)
To avoid abuse of powers, legislation foresees written consent of the supervisory prosecutor as necessary precondition to conclude plea agreement and to amend its provisions. (Article 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)

====Oversight over the plea agreement====

Plea agreement without the approval of the court does not have the legal effect. 
The court must satisfy itself that the plea agreement is concluded on the basis of the free will of the defendant, that the defendant fully acknowledges the essence of the plea agreement and its consequences. (Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia)

A guilty plea of the defendant is not enough to render a guilty judgment. (Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia) Consequently, the court is obliged to discuss two issues:

* Whether irrefutable evidence is presented which proves the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
* Whether the sentence provided for in the plea agreement is legitimate. (Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia).
After both criteria are satisfied the court additionally checks whether formalities related to the legislative requirements are followed and only then makes its decision.

If the court finds that presented evidence is not sufficient to support the charges or that a motion to render a judgment without substantial consideration of a case is submitted in violation of the requirements stipulated by the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia, it shall return the case to the prosecution. The court before returning the case to the prosecutor offers the parties to change the terms of the agreement. If the changed terms do not satisfy the court, then it shall return the case to the prosecution. (Article 213 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia).

If the court satisfies itself that the defendant fully acknowledges the consequences of the plea agreement, and he or she was represented by the defense council, his or her will is expressed in full compliance with the legislative requirements without deception and coercion, also if there is enough body of doubtless evidence for the conviction and the agreement is reached on legitimate sentence - the court approves the plea agreement and renders guilty judgment. If any of the abovementioned requirements are not satisfied, the court rejects to approve the plea agreement and returns the case to the prosecutor. (Article 213 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia).

====Role of the victim in plea agreement negotiations====

The plea agreement is concluded between the parties - the prosecutor and the defendant. Notwithstanding the fact that the victim is not party to the criminal case and the prosecutor is not a tool in the hands of the victim to obtain revenge against the offender, the attitude of the victim in relation to the plea agreement is still important.

Under Article 217 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia, the prosecutor is obliged to consult with the victim prior to concluding the plea agreement and inform him or her about this. In addition, under the Guidelines of the Prosecution Service of Georgia, the prosecutor is obliged to take into consideration the interests of the victim and as a rule conclude the plea agreement after the damage is compensated.

===Germany===
Plea agreements have made a limited appearance in Germany.<ref>{{Citation|volume=31|publisher=Isr. L. Rev.|page=169|year=1997|title=Converging Criminal Justice Systems: Guilty Pleas and the Public Interest|author=Goldstein, Abraham S.|url=http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/israel31&section=12|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120119022444/http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals%2Fisrael31&section=12|archive-date=2012-01-19}}</ref> However, there is no exact equivalent of a guilty plea in German criminal procedure.<ref>{{Citation|volume=53|page=755|date=1991–1992|title=Bargaining Justice - A Bargain for German Criminal Justice|journal=University of Pittsburgh Law Review|author=Herrmann, Joachim|url=http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/upitt53&div=26&id=&page=|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150502202921/http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals%2Fupitt53&div=26&id=&page=|archive-date=2015-05-02}}</ref>

===Italy===
Italy has a form of bargaining, popularly known as ''patteggiamento'' but that has a technical name of penalty application under request of the parts. In fact, the bargaining is not about the charges, but about the penalty applied in sentence, reduced up to<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Buonomo|first1=Giampiero|title=Sul rapporto tra patteggiamento e condanna penale|url=https://www.academia.edu/11432617|website=Academia.edu|access-date=28 June 2017|language=it|date=21 October 2000|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180508084713/http://www.academia.edu/11432617/Sul_rapporto_tra_patteggiamento_e_condanna_penale|archive-date=8 May 2018}}</ref> one third.

When the defendant deems that the punishment that would, concretely, be handed down is less than a five-year imprisonment (or that it would just be a fine), the defendant may request to plea bargain with the prosecutor. The defendant is rewarded with a reduction on the sentence and has other advantages (such as that the defendant does not pay the fees on the proceeding). The defendant must accept the penalty for the charges (even if the plea-bargained sentence has some particular matters in further compensation proceedings), no matter how serious the charges are.

Sometimes, the prosecutor agrees to reduce a charge or to drop some of multiple charges in exchange for the defendant's acceptance of the penalty. The defendant, in the request, could argue with the penalty and aggravating and extenuating circumstancing with the prosecutor, that can accept or refuse. The request could also be made by the prosecutor. The plea bargaining could be granted if the penalty that could be concretely applied is, after the reduction of one third, inferior to five-year imprisonment (so called ''patteggiamento allargato'', wide bargaining); When the penalty applied, after the reduction of one third, is inferior of two years imprisonment or is only a fine (so called "patteggiamento ristretto" limited bargaining), the defendant can have other advantages, like sentence suspended and the effacement of the crime if in five year of the sentence, the defendant does not commit a similar crime.

In the request, when it could be applied the conditional suspension of the penalty according to the article 163 and following of the Italian penal code, the defendant could subordinate the request to the grant of the suspension; if the judge rejects the suspension, the bargaining is refused. When both the prosecutor and the defendant have come to an agreement, the proposal is submitted to the judge, who can refuse or accept the plea bargaining.

According to Italian law, a bargain does not need a guilty plea (in Italy there is no plea declaration); for this reason, a bargaining sentence is only an acceptance of the penalty in exchange with the stop of investigation and trial and has no binding cogency in other trials, especially in civil trials in which parts argue of the same facts at the effects of civil liability and in other criminal trials in which are processed the accomplices of the defendant that had requested and got a bargaining sentence.<ref>{{cite web|title=Italian criminal trial|url=http://www.canestrinilex.com/resources/trial/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131220175428/http://www.canestrinilex.com/resources/trial/|url-status=dead|archive-date=20 December 2013|website=Studio Legal Canestrini|access-date=28 June 2017|date=26 March 2012}}</ref>

===Japan===
In [[law of Japan|Japan]], plea bargaining was previously forbidden by law, although sources reported that prosecutors illegally offered defendants plea bargains in exchange for their confessions.<ref>{{cite news |title=The Way We Live Now: 9-29-02: Crash Course; Plea Bargain |date=September 29, 2002 |first=Dirk |last=Olin |work=[[The New York Times]] |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/29/magazine/the-way-we-live-now-9-29-02-crash-course-plea-bargain.html |access-date=February 13, 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140309100704/http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/29/magazine/the-way-we-live-now-9-29-02-crash-course-plea-bargain.html |archive-date=March 9, 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book 
|title=The Japanese Way of Justice : Prosecuting Crime in Japan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qIHNWWx0ZOIC&pg=PA245 |first=David T. |last=Johnson |year=2002 | publisher=Oxford University Press |access-date=February 13, 2014 |isbn=9780195344233 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |url=http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2844&context=llr |journal=[[Loyola Law School]] |date=November 14, 2013 |title=Peeking Behind the Plea Bargaining Process: ''Missouri v. Frye'' & ''Lafler v. Cooper'' |access-date=February 13, 2014 |first=Laurie L. |last=Levenson |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140221175643/http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2844&context=llr |archive-date=February 21, 2014 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book 
|title=International Criminal Procedure: The Interface of Civil Law and Common Law Legal Systems |editor1=Linda Carter |editor2=Fausto Pocar |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kudSfeIbRk0C&pg=PA40 |location=[[London]] |year=2013 |publisher=Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd |page=40 |chapter=Plea bargaining |first=Jenia I. |last=Turner |isbn=9780857939586 |access-date=February 13, 2014 }}</ref>

Plea bargaining was introduced in Japan in June 2018. The first case of plea bargaining under this system, in July 2018, involved allegations of bribery by Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems in Thailand.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2018/07/21/editorials/japans-first-ever-plea-bargain/|title=Japan's first-ever plea bargain {{!}} The Japan Times|work=The Japan Times|access-date=2018-11-20|language=en-US}}</ref> The second case was a November 2018 deal to obtain evidence of accounting and securities law violations against [[Nissan]] executives [[Carlos Ghosn]] and Greg Kelly.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-20/questions-swirl-over-what-felled-ghosn-as-property-deals-raised|title=Ghosn's Downfall Sparks Questions on Links to Property, Expenses|last=Reidy|first=Gearoid|date=2018-11-19|website=Bloomberg|access-date=2018-11-20}}</ref>

Under the Japanese system, formally known as the {{Nihongo|"mutual consultation and agreement system"|協議・合意制度|kyogi-goi seido}}, plea bargaining is available in prosecutions for organized crime, competition law violations, and economic crimes such as securities law violations. The prosecutor, defendant, and defense counsel each sign a written agreement, which must then be admitted into evidence in a public court without delay.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXMZO38740470Q8A211C1000000/|title=日産の司法取引、内容いつ公表？ 米国と異なる制度|date=2018-12-11|website=The Nikkei|language=ja|access-date=2018-12-11}}</ref>

===Poland===
Poland also adopted a limited form of plea bargaining, which is applicable only to minor felonies (punishable by no more than 10 years of imprisonment). The procedure is called "voluntary submission to a penalty" and allows the court to pass an agreed sentence without reviewing the evidence, which significantly shortens the trial.
There are some specific conditions that have to be simultaneously met:
* the defendant pleads guilty and proposes a penalty,
* the prosecutor agrees,
* the victim agrees,
* the court agrees.
However, the court may object to the terms of proposed plea agreement (even if already agreed between the defendant, victim and prosecutor) and suggest changes (not specific but rather general). If the defendant accepts these suggestions and changes his penalty proposition, the court approves it and passes the verdict according to the plea agreement. In spite of the agreement, all the parties of the trial: prosecution, defendant and the victim as an auxiliary prosecutor (in Poland, the victim may declare that he wants to act as an "auxiliary prosecutor" and consequently gains the rights similar to official prosecutor) - have the right to appeal.<ref>{{Citation |last=Langer |first=Máximo |title=Plea bargaining as second-best criminal adjudication and the future of criminal procedure thought in global perspective |date=2024-04-16 |work=Research Handbook on Plea Bargaining and Criminal Justice |pages=552–574 |url=https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802206678.00043 |access-date=2025-02-11 |publisher=Edward Elgar Publishing |isbn=978-1-80220-667-8}}</ref>

===Spain===
Spain has relatively recently adopted a limited form of plea bargaining and the procedure is called a "conformity sentence" meaning the accused is in agreement and can only be used in minor charges but not in serious charges where nine or more years of prison may be imposed.<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://www.conceptosjuridicos.com/sentencia-de-conformidad/ | title=Sentencia de Conformidad: Concepto y requisitos | date=25 February 2019 }}</ref>