Does the Plea Negotiations and Agreements Act provide adequate protection to accused persons in Zambia?

Abstract

Plea bargaining has become part and parcel of the criminal justice system in Zambia. Its formal recognition is encapsulated in the Plea Negotiations and Agreements Act No. 20 of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as’ the Act’). By its very nature plea bargaining requires Accused persons to relinquish some of their constitutional rights by admitting criminal liability in exchange for the reduction of the charges against them including receipt of less serious penal sanctions. Considering the vulnerable position of accused persons in a country that primarily punishes criminal conduct with imprisonment, this paper seeks to establish whether or not the Act provides adequate safeguards for accused persons engaged in plea bargaining. The paper identifies a number of weaknesses with the plea bargaining process and the Act including overloaded defence counsel and possible compromise in the objectivity of the courts considering their assigned role in the plea bargaining process. The article concludes that plea bargaining must be the exception rather than the rule in determining criminal matters to avoid unjust outcomes. However, where plea bargaining is adopted it must be conducted in a transparent and accountable manner. Further, the adequacy of the Act depends on increased provision of legal aid services for accused persons. Lastly, it recommends for reform to the Act by accommodating the concerns highlighted in this paper.