Syyteneuvottelun soveltamisalan rajoitukset yleisen ja yksityisen edun kannalta
Avainsanat:
rikosoikeus, rikosprosessi, kriminaalipolitiikka, syyteneuvottelu, tunnustus, sovitteluAbstrakti
Limitations of the scope of application of plea bargaining from the points of view of public and private interest
Although the justification of the plea bargaining system is strongly linked to procedural efficiency, other aspects need to be taken into account in its application as well. For example, some criminal offences that can be very burdensome to investigate are nonetheless excluded from its scope of application. It can thus be seen that arguments other than procedural efficiency also have a significant impact. However, the latter still play a regrettably small role. In this article, the purpose of the author is to highlight arguments, other than procedural efficiency, for and against plea bargaining, and to explain how these affect – and how they should affect – its scope of application.
The assessment of criminal offenses that are suited for plea bargaining requires that both the degree of punishability of the act and its other characteristics are taken into account. In addition, the link between a common sense of justice (public interest) and the protection of the victim (private interest) is stronger than the nature of the plea bargaining system would otherwise suggest. In the light of these considerations, limitations of the scope of application can be considered to be somewhat justifiable, although the arguments are not convincing in all respects. In the view of the author, not all current limitations can be upheld with reference to the type of offense or the relevant penalty scale. In other words, there may also be cases and situations suited for plea bargaining that are currently excluded from its scope of application. The categorical limitations do not allow for case-by-case assessment of suitability. Thus, the varying features and interests of different cases cannot be taken into account in an appropriate and justifiable way. One option would be to extend the scope of application so that the decision on the suitability of a case for plea bargaining is left to the discretion of the authorities on a case-by-case basis.
