This thesis deals with plea bargaining, a method of settling criminal cases without
litigation. Plea bargaining is any agreement by the accused to plead guilty in return for the
promise of some benefit.
While the practice is openly discussed in Canada, little literature exists about this
topic in Austria. An analysis of the practice is thus made by comparing the Austrian law
enforcement system to the Canadian one. After a comparison of the rules and principles
that govern the procedures in both countries, the thesis deals with the problems that are
caused by plea bargains. Proponents have said that plea bargaining is a practice that eases
the administration of justice without either prejudicing the rights of the innocent or
occasioning real injustice to the guilty. The second part of this work thus focuses on the
rights of the accused and the rules that are designed to protect him.
The defendant who pleads guilty receives mild treatment as a reward for his
admission of guilt. Whether or not this is consistent with the public's claim for justice is
dealt with in part three of the essay. The method used is an exploration of the goals and
purposes of criminal punishment in Austria and Canada. It is shown that plea bargaining
not only causes a lack of protection for the accused, it also creates inequality. The practice
leads to a goal displacement. In the pursuit of efficiency the original goals of the penal
system and the idea of justice are neglected.Law, Peter A. Allard School ofGraduat
