
Plea bargaining refers to the process of negotiating a guilty plea in exchange for a reduced sentence, lesser charge, or dropping some charges. It has become a standard practice in the American criminal justice system and is used in over 90% of cases. Although plea bargaining is designed to expedite the justice process and save time and money, it has been a subject of controversy in the legal community.

While supporters of plea bargaining argue that it is a necessary tool for prosecutors to manage overloaded dockets and ensure that justice is served promptly, critics raise several concerns that cast doubt on the ethical implications and effectiveness of the practice. Some of these concerns include:
1. Innocent individuals may plead guilty:
One of the biggest arguments against plea bargaining is that it can lead to innocent individuals pleading guilty. Defendants who cannot afford a proper defense or face the possibility of lengthy prison sentences may feel coerced into confessing to a crime they did not commit. While prosecutors often argue that accepting a plea means admitting to the crime in question, the reality is that many individuals do so only to avoid harsher consequences and the risk of being sent to jail for a longer period than is necessary.
2. Negotiating away serious charges:
Another critical problem with plea bargaining is that it allows prosecutors to negotiate away serious charges. This can result in defendants facing only trivial charges or being released altogether, even if they have actually committed more serious crimes. The plea bargaining process often prioritizes prosecutors’ interests of securing a conviction over the need for justice to be served.

3. Plea bargains prevent trials from occurring:
Plea bargaining has led to a decline in the number of criminal trials in the justice process. Instead, defendants are more likely to accept plea deals to avoid the risk of harsher consequences if they go to trial. This leads to a situation where many crimes go unpunished because defendants who could have been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt choose to plead guilty instead, hence denying the victim and society justice.
The plea bargaining process creates a worrying paradox. On the one hand, it allows for the efficient administration of justice by reducing cases in the court. On the other hand, it raises many ethical and legal questions concerning the absence of due process, the legitimacy of the convictions, and the access of justice for marginalized defendants. While it may be necessary for prosecutors to manage their caseloads, the plea bargaining process has to be tailored in ways that minimize the risk of creating injustices in the justice system.