Journalists’ Perceptions on Plea Bargain as an Anti- Corruption Tool in Nigeria

Abstract

Corruption, a universal challenge and Nigeria's most debilitating problem, continues to dominate national discourse. Among the legal tools available to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), plea bargaining has emerged as a controversial method. This study investigates journalists’ perceptions on the effectiveness of plea bargaining in Nigeria's anti- corruption initiatives. A qualitative approach was utilised to assess whether or not, plea bargain has led to a decrease in criminal activities, including how the political elite manipulate it to influence the judiciary, and its overall impact on the level of corruption in Nigeria. Twenty-five journalists participated through convenience sampling and in-depth interviews. Results indicate that plea bargaining is perceived as unethical and ineffective, primarily benefiting affluent individuals while undermining public interest. Consequently, this practice allows Nigeria's elite to evade accountability from corrupt actions, thereby hampering national progress and retarding anti- corruption efforts. The study advocates for a robust campaign by citizens, labour unions, and civil society against plea bargaining in financial crime prosecutions. Furthermore, it suggests that public officials should receive recognition for integrity while facing repercussions for dishonesty, and the adoption of technology within Nigeria's criminal justice system to enhance efficacy.