In accordance with Article 217 of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure, the prosecutor is required to consult the victim and inform him before the end of the plea. In addition, under the instructions of the Georgian Crown, the prosecutor is required to consider the interests of the victim and, as a general rule, to enter into the plea contract after compensation for the damage. If the court finds that the evidence presented is not sufficient to support the indictment or if an application for a decision without substantial consideration of a case is filed in violation of the requirements of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure, it must refer the case to the Crown. The court before the case is returned to the Crown offers the parties to amend the terms of the agreement. If the amended conditions do not comply with the court, then he will return the matter to the prosecutor`s office. (Article 213 of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure). In civil legal systems, haggling is extremely difficult. Unlike common law systems, civil law systems have no recourse if the defendant confesses; a confession is in evidence, but the prosecutor is not exempt from the requirement to present a full case. A court may decide that an accused is innocent, even if he or she has made a full confession.
Unlike common law systems, prosecutors in civil law countries may not have the power to drop or reduce costs after a case has been filed, and in some countries their power to drop or reduce costs before a case is filed is limited, making oral arguments impossible. Since the 1980s, many civil law nations have adapted their systems to allow for oral arguments.  In 2009, in a case in which it was questioned whether evidence of a plea in the United States was permitted in a Danish criminal trial (297/2008 H), the Supreme Court of Denmark (Danish: Hejesteret) unanimously ruled that the oral arguments were excellent. under Danish law, but that witnesses can testify independently in the specific case (provided that the trial considers the possibility to be false or, at the very least, influenced by the advantages of the plea).  However, the Supreme Court has indicated that Danish law contains mechanisms similar to oral arguments, such as. B 10 of the Danish Penal Code (Danish: penalfeloven), which stipulates that a sentence can be reduced if the offender provides an offence that contributes to the resolution of another crime committed by others, or . 23 bis of the Danish Competition Act (Danish: konkurrenceloven), which stipulates that someone may ask to avoid a fine or criminal prosecution for participation in an agreement if it provides information on the cartel that the authorities cannot make at this stage.   A prosecutor may want to maintain a high conviction rate or avoid losing high-level trials, creating the potential for him to enter into a plea that favours their interests, but reduces the potential for prosecution and punishment to deter crimes.  Prosecutors may also make prosecution decisions that have a significant impact on an accused`s sentence, and may lay charges or propose arguments that themselves induce an innocent accused to consider or accept a plea. Under Italian law, a good deal does not need an admission of guilt (there are no pleas in Italy); for this reason, a negotiating penalty is merely an acceptance of the sentence in exchange for the closing of the investigation and the procedure and has no binding cogenity in other trials, particularly in civil trials where parties of the same facts are dealt with on the effects of civil liability and in other criminal proceedings where the accused`s accomplices who have sought and received a trial sentence are treated.  The oral arguments were introduced in Japan in June 2018.