GERMAINE RAE P. SURBAN | ALFRED AGUILA | JAY RANIEL M. DE CHAVEZ | HILJUN O. PERIDO
This study entitled “Plea Bargaining In Drug Cases: Its Impact To Criminal Justice System†was conducted to assess the impact of plea bargaining in drug cases on the Criminal Justice System. The researchers utilized purposive sampling in selecting respondents for the study. The respondents of the study were composed of six (6) groups which serve as the components of the Criminal Justice System. The researchers also utilized convenience sampling among the judges of Regional Trial Courts in Lipa City since one of the judges was unavailable and refused to answer the questionnaire. Convenience sampling was also used in selecting and gathering data among the detainees/former detainees. The research instruments utilized were a self-made questionnaire and structured interview among the barangay officials and detainees/former detainees. The statistics safely concluded that there is a significant difference in the assessment of criminal justice system pillars on plea bargaining in the criminal justice system when grouped accordingly. On the other hand, there is a significant relationship between age, pillar, and length of service profile of the respondents and their assessment on the impact of plea bargaining in drug cases in terms of protection of innocent, guilty, and society principles while there is no significant relationship between gender profile of the respondents and their assessment on the impact of plea bargaining in drug cases in terms of protection of innocent, guilty and society principles. The assessment revealed that former detainees/detainees agreed that plea bargaining weakens the protection of innocent, guilty, and society principles among the Criminal Justice System pillars. In addition, they believed that the bargaining system is deficient in identifying which defendants are guilty of the crime charged, and the negotiation's success depends upon personal attributes or financial resources. The community wherein the criminals are reintegrated ranked as secondly affected by plea bargaining. They believed that facilitating early release and reintegrating them into society with no means of prior rehabilitation is the most adverse effect of plea bargaining to the community. Meanwhile, the prosecution pillar's assessment revealed that they agreed on the protection of innocent principle but only partially agreed that plea bargaining has an undermining effect towards the protection of guilty and society principle. But among the pillars, the court pillar strongly disagreed that plea bargaining has a negative impact on our Criminal Justice System. They reject problems displayed in protecting innocent, guilty, and society principles. However, it is interesting to note that the court partially agreed that by facilitating the early release of convicts, plea bargaining allows and increases the opportunity for them to repeat offenses. While it is evident that assessment of the impact of plea bargaining varies among different pillars, it must be annotated that pillars of the criminal justice system function like a chain of links. Any weakness in any of these links or pillars may break the chain, resulting in the breakdown of the system.
Philippine E-Journals
