De Lima files bill providing clear guidelines on plea bargaining agreement
Published Mar 29, 2018 16:53 pm
|
Updated Mar 29, 2018 16:53 pm
By Hannah Torregoza
Senator Leila de Lima on Thursday sought for the early passage of the bill seeking to provide clear guidelines on plea bargaining agreement in criminal cases saying it should be laid down to avoid the process from being abused.
Senator Leila de Lima (REUTERS/Romeo Ranoco / MANILA BULLETIN)
“Imbued with public interest, plea bargaining is ideally intended to primarily serve the best interest of justice, of the State and of its people, without unduly transgressing on the right of the accused to due process,” de Lima said in the explanatory note of Senate Bill No. 1677.
“While the intended benefits of plea bargaining to all the stakeholders is not contested, our very own history, however, proves witness to the unfortunate misuse and abuse of the process, often to the great disadvantage of the Filipino people,” she explained.
De Lima filed the bill in light of recent developments over pork barrel fund scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, who is reportedly mulling a plea bargaining deal with the Duterte government.
Napoles’ camp, she pointed out, has admitted that they were studying the possibility of filing a motion for plea bargain deal to lower her cases from plunder to a bailable offense.
The senator said coupled with the Duterte administration’s softening stance on the principal accused, it would be a “travesty of justice if a sweetheart deal is eventually reached” and may weaken the pending cases before the courts.
“Thus, there is an urgent need for the development of a formal policy to establish concrete guideposts in the implementation of plea bargaining,” she stressed.
“The setting of guidelines, including the imposition of sanction for violation thereof, ensures that the process does not become a mere vehicle for diluting the gravity of the offense charged against the accused, for destroying the deterrent value of the law intended to proscribe the offense committed, and/or for creating opportunities for graft and corrupt practices,” de Lima said.
She said Section 2, Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure lays down the basis for plea bargaining as “a process whereby the accused and the prosecution enter into a reciprocally satisfactory disposition of the case subject to Court approval.”
A lawyer by profession, De Lima proposed that plea bargaining should be in accordance with several principles, such as its initial consideration and final terms should both primarily contribute to the benefit of the public, and shall not be pursued when it will only serve to tone down the seriousness of the offense charged against the accused.
In her bill, de Lima, likewise, proposed that in all cases, the penalty for the lesser offense to which the accused may be allowed to plead guilty shall not be more than two degrees lower than the imposable penalty for the offense charged.
When it comes to the time of availment of plea bargaining, the detained lawmaker suggested that at arraignment, the accused may be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense with the consent of the offended party, the prosecutor, and any additional party should be deemed necessary.
She also said the accused may also be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense after withdrawing a plea of not guilty to the original offense charged during the course of trial and before the presentation of evidence of the defense.
De Lima also recommended that the prosecution be allowed to enter into plea bargaining with the accused during or after the presentation of the evidence of the prosecution, but before the presentation of the evidence of the defense, provided that the evidence of the prosecution is insufficient to prove the offense charged.
The measure also allows the prosecution to also enter into plea bargaining during the course of trial in cases involving the recovery by the offended party of property in crimes against property and those committed by public officers in relation to public funds and in cases of conspiracy where the accused cooperates by documentary object and testimonial evidence, among others.
Under the bill, De Lima also suggested that the plea bargaining agreement shall first be approved by required authorities listed in the measure if the penalty imposable for the offense charged is prision mayor, or six years and one day imprisonment, or higher, or a fine exceeding P1.2-million.
Senator Leila de Lima (REUTERS/Romeo Ranoco / MANILA BULLETIN)
“Imbued with public interest, plea bargaining is ideally intended to primarily serve the best interest of justice, of the State and of its people, without unduly transgressing on the right of the accused to due process,” de Lima said in the explanatory note of Senate Bill No. 1677.
“While the intended benefits of plea bargaining to all the stakeholders is not contested, our very own history, however, proves witness to the unfortunate misuse and abuse of the process, often to the great disadvantage of the Filipino people,” she explained.
De Lima filed the bill in light of recent developments over pork barrel fund scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, who is reportedly mulling a plea bargaining deal with the Duterte government.
Napoles’ camp, she pointed out, has admitted that they were studying the possibility of filing a motion for plea bargain deal to lower her cases from plunder to a bailable offense.
The senator said coupled with the Duterte administration’s softening stance on the principal accused, it would be a “travesty of justice if a sweetheart deal is eventually reached” and may weaken the pending cases before the courts.
“Thus, there is an urgent need for the development of a formal policy to establish concrete guideposts in the implementation of plea bargaining,” she stressed.
“The setting of guidelines, including the imposition of sanction for violation thereof, ensures that the process does not become a mere vehicle for diluting the gravity of the offense charged against the accused, for destroying the deterrent value of the law intended to proscribe the offense committed, and/or for creating opportunities for graft and corrupt practices,” de Lima said.
She said Section 2, Rule 116 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure lays down the basis for plea bargaining as “a process whereby the accused and the prosecution enter into a reciprocally satisfactory disposition of the case subject to Court approval.”
A lawyer by profession, De Lima proposed that plea bargaining should be in accordance with several principles, such as its initial consideration and final terms should both primarily contribute to the benefit of the public, and shall not be pursued when it will only serve to tone down the seriousness of the offense charged against the accused.
In her bill, de Lima, likewise, proposed that in all cases, the penalty for the lesser offense to which the accused may be allowed to plead guilty shall not be more than two degrees lower than the imposable penalty for the offense charged.
When it comes to the time of availment of plea bargaining, the detained lawmaker suggested that at arraignment, the accused may be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense with the consent of the offended party, the prosecutor, and any additional party should be deemed necessary.
She also said the accused may also be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser offense after withdrawing a plea of not guilty to the original offense charged during the course of trial and before the presentation of evidence of the defense.
De Lima also recommended that the prosecution be allowed to enter into plea bargaining with the accused during or after the presentation of the evidence of the prosecution, but before the presentation of the evidence of the defense, provided that the evidence of the prosecution is insufficient to prove the offense charged.
The measure also allows the prosecution to also enter into plea bargaining during the course of trial in cases involving the recovery by the offended party of property in crimes against property and those committed by public officers in relation to public funds and in cases of conspiracy where the accused cooperates by documentary object and testimonial evidence, among others.
Under the bill, De Lima also suggested that the plea bargaining agreement shall first be approved by required authorities listed in the measure if the penalty imposable for the offense charged is prision mayor, or six years and one day imprisonment, or higher, or a fine exceeding P1.2-million.