— to improve judicial speed, efficiency, Attorney-General Nandlall says

GUYANA’S judicial landscape is on the brink of a major shift, as the National Assembly, on Friday, passed a bill establishing plea agreements, which is expected to expedite legal proceedings and better allocate judicial resources.

The Criminal Procedure (Plea Discussion and Plea Agreement) Bill seeks to repeal the Criminal Procedure (Plea Bargaining and Plea Agreement) Act Cap 10:09.
Minister of Legal Affairs and Attorney-General, Anil Nandlall, S.C., who piloted the bill, during his address on Friday, highlighted that the new act would enhance judicial efficiency and save significant judicial resources.

“This plea-bargaining law is intended to bring speed to the system, to bring efficiency to the system, and to save billions of dollars in judicial resources. It allows the prosecution and the accused person to sit and work out a deal if the accused person wants to plead guilty, then that deal is entered into, but there are a number of safeguards—the victim interest has to be taken into account,” Nandlall said.

He further explained that plea-bargaining could occur even before charges are instituted, allowing suspects to become state witnesses to secure convictions and ensure a fair system.
“This is not intended to water down or to dilute the system of punishment for wrongdoers. It is to ensure that interest is served. All plea deals must end up in the court and the court will either object or adopt and ratify the deal,” Nandlall added.

The bill received widespread support, with Opposition Parliamentarians Khemraj Ramjattan and Geeta Chandan-Edmond, who are both attorneys supporting the landmark bill.
“This bill presented by the Government of Guyana… marks yet another significant step forward in our criminal Justice system.

“The fact that even the opposition stance in support of this bill is an important indicator and testament to its importance, and its potential to positively impact our society and the justice system,” Chandan-Edmond said in support of the bill.

However, the opposition asked that certain safeguards be put in place, especially to scrutinise members of the Guyana Police Force, so that justice and transparency are ensured.
People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPP/C) Parliamentarians, Sanjeev Datadin and Minster of Local Government and Regional Development, Sonia Parag— who are also attorneys-at-law— welcomed the bill.

According to Datadin, the bill will be important for the criminal justice system and will change the legal landscape in Guyana.
“The landscape is changing right before our eyes,” he said as he explained that the bill will safeguard the rights of individuals in the legal process.

The bill is structured into several parts, each addressing different aspects of the plea agreement process.
Part One of the bill outlines the preliminary provisions, including the short title and commencement of the legislation. It also provides definitions for key terms such as “improper inducement,” “a particular course of action,” “suspect,” and “victim.”

Importantly, the bill defines the scope and nature of a plea agreement, setting the stage for its implementation in subsequent parts.
Part Two deals with the procedure surrounding plea discussions, imposing requirements for obtaining permission from the Director of Public Prosecutions before entering into such discussions or concluding a plea agreement.

Also, a prosecutor is prohibited from initiating or participating in a plea discussion or concluding a plea agreement if the accused person, or any person or company holding assets or interests on their behalf, or any property owned by the accused, could be subject to a pecuniary penalty order, forfeiture order, or civil forfeiture order.

The bill also establishes the rights of an accused person to have legal representation during plea discussions, ensuring fairness and protection of their interests.
Part Three focuses on victim impact statements, emphasising the rights of victims and their families. The bill outlines the duty of prosecutors to inform victims of their right to provide impact statements while setting limitations on the content that can be included.

It also provides procedures for cases where victims are deceased, ill, incapacitated, or cannot be found, allowing their relatives or authorised representatives to provide impact statements.
Part Four lays out the procedure for plea agreements and plea agreement hearings. It establishes the necessary documents that must accompany a plea agreement, including its filing with the Clerk of the Court or Registrar.

The bill outlines the timeframe for conducting plea agreement hearings and provides guidelines for cases where an agreement is filed before or during committal proceedings. It clarifies that acceptance of a plea agreement is not binding on the court and outlines the process for an accused person to withdraw from an agreement.

Finally, Part Five includes general and miscellaneous provisions, including avenues for appeals by both accused persons and the Director of Public Prosecutions in cases where plea agreements are rejected.

It also addresses the admissibility of withdrawn plea agreements as evidence and empowers the court to order the sealing of records related to plea discussions or agreements.
Under the act, the minister is granted authority to amend the schedule and make regulations as needed.