Examining the Discretional Powers of Trial Courts in the Withdrawal and Change of Pleas by Defendants in Criminal Trials

Abstract

Informing an accused person or a defendant promptly in the language that he understands and in detail of the nature of the offence(s) for which he is standing trial, technically called arraignment is a fundamental constitutional question a breach of which renders any criminal proceedings a nullity. To make assurance doubly sure, every person charged with a criminal offence shall be entitled to have, without payment, the assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand the language used at the trial of the offence. It is after the trial court is satisfied that the defendant has understood the charge read, and explained to him that the court calls upon him to plead to the charge. A plea is an accused person’s formal response of guilty or not guilty or no contest to a criminal charge. Arraignment marks the beginning of a criminal trial. Does a defendant who has understood the charge read and explained to him and freely pleaded to it have the right to change his plea as a matter of course in the course of the proceedings before judgment? In other words, does such a defendant have the right to change his plea at will without any intervention by the trial judge? This Chapter examines the role of a trial judge in the withdrawal and change of plea by a defendant in the course of a criminal trial. Doctrinal research methodology is used in collating and critically analysing some relevant learned books, articles, statutes, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, and judicial decisions. Personal experience, also, plays a significant role in the research. The Paper concludes that a trial judge has the discretion to allow or refuse a defendant to change his plea in a criminal trial.

Keywords: Discretional Power, Change of Plea, Court, Guilty, Criminal Proceedings, Defendant, Court