Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique

The idea of “justice” normatively reflects “justitia” in the Roman worldview: “fiat justitia, ruat caelum” (may there be justice though the heavens fall). That is, justice must prevail no matter whose ox is gored. In its corrective schema, justice is connected to the ideas of just desert. Justice in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sule Peter Echewija
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: The International Academic Forum 2017-10-01
Series:IAFOR Journal of Ethics, Religion & Philosophy
Subjects:
Online Access:https://iafor.org/journal/iafor-journal-of-ethics-religion-and-philosophy/volume-3-issue-2/article-3/
_version_ 1818446334673289216
author Sule Peter Echewija
author_facet Sule Peter Echewija
author_sort Sule Peter Echewija
collection DOAJ
description The idea of “justice” normatively reflects “justitia” in the Roman worldview: “fiat justitia, ruat caelum” (may there be justice though the heavens fall). That is, justice must prevail no matter whose ox is gored. In its corrective schema, justice is connected to the ideas of just desert. Justice in this sense is possible through a just law couched within the principle of retributivism (where punishment is proportionate to the severity of crime). This idea must remain intact if criminal justice, as a form of social control, is to attain the moral and political legitimacy to which it aspires. Unfortunately, these ideals are constantly at risk in Nigeria’s criminal justice system, especially in the prosecution of corrupt crimes where convictions have largely been plea bargained. Plea bargaining exploits the insubstantiality of Nigeria’s criminal codes and its proponents argue from a cost-benefit analysis stance that pits cost against justice. This prima facie approach inexorably leads to the following questions: what are the requirements of justice? Is criminal justice concerned with justice to the offender or victims of crime? Is a court ruling necessarily just? The paper attempts to answer these questions in showing that justice transcends mere court rulings and is underpinned by certain moral ideals: a moral operating principle of the judicial process and the degree to which a people or victims of crime perceive their penal system as just. The current application of plea bargaining in Nigeria fails to satisfy these moral requirements of justice.
first_indexed 2024-12-14T19:46:05Z
format Article
id doaj.art-16adfa8592754a9e896073f78584bff2
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2187-0624
2187-0624
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-14T19:46:05Z
publishDate 2017-10-01
publisher The International Academic Forum
record_format Article
series IAFOR Journal of Ethics, Religion & Philosophy
spelling doaj.art-16adfa8592754a9e896073f78584bff22022-12-21T22:49:34ZengThe International Academic ForumIAFOR Journal of Ethics, Religion & Philosophy2187-06242187-06242017-10-01323547doi.org/10.22492/ijerp.3.2.03Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral CritiqueSule Peter Echewija0Department of Philosophy, Federal University Lafia, NigeriaThe idea of “justice” normatively reflects “justitia” in the Roman worldview: “fiat justitia, ruat caelum” (may there be justice though the heavens fall). That is, justice must prevail no matter whose ox is gored. In its corrective schema, justice is connected to the ideas of just desert. Justice in this sense is possible through a just law couched within the principle of retributivism (where punishment is proportionate to the severity of crime). This idea must remain intact if criminal justice, as a form of social control, is to attain the moral and political legitimacy to which it aspires. Unfortunately, these ideals are constantly at risk in Nigeria’s criminal justice system, especially in the prosecution of corrupt crimes where convictions have largely been plea bargained. Plea bargaining exploits the insubstantiality of Nigeria’s criminal codes and its proponents argue from a cost-benefit analysis stance that pits cost against justice. This prima facie approach inexorably leads to the following questions: what are the requirements of justice? Is criminal justice concerned with justice to the offender or victims of crime? Is a court ruling necessarily just? The paper attempts to answer these questions in showing that justice transcends mere court rulings and is underpinned by certain moral ideals: a moral operating principle of the judicial process and the degree to which a people or victims of crime perceive their penal system as just. The current application of plea bargaining in Nigeria fails to satisfy these moral requirements of justice.https://iafor.org/journal/iafor-journal-of-ethics-religion-and-philosophy/volume-3-issue-2/article-3/justiceplea bargainweak lawscrime severityproportionate punishment
spellingShingle Sule Peter Echewija
Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique
IAFOR Journal of Ethics, Religion & Philosophy
justice
plea bargain
weak laws
crime severity
proportionate punishment
title Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique
title_full Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique
title_fullStr Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique
title_full_unstemmed Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique
title_short Plea Bargaining and the Administration of Criminal Justice in Nigeria: A Moral Critique
title_sort plea bargaining and the administration of criminal justice in nigeria a moral critique
topic justice
plea bargain
weak laws
crime severity
proportionate punishment
url https://iafor.org/journal/iafor-journal-of-ethics-religion-and-philosophy/volume-3-issue-2/article-3/
work_keys_str_mv AT sulepeterechewija pleabargainingandtheadministrationofcriminaljusticeinnigeriaamoralcritique