Selective Prosecution

Selective prosecution is the application of criminal laws to one class of people while failing to apply those same laws to other groups that are not part of the targeted group. A procedural defence known as selective prosecution is used by the defendant to argue that he shouldn't be charged with a crime for breaking the law as a result of this unfair treatment. A claim of selective prosecution may include an allegation that other people of a different age, race, religion, or gender engaged in the same unlawful activity but the accused should not be prosecuted.

What is the Meaning of Selective Prosecution?

A selective prosecution is a defence, accused assert that they should not be held liable for the violation of law because the judicial system discriminates against them for the prosecution. In defence of allegations of selective prosecution, the defendants essentially contend that whether or not they broke the law is irrelevant; what matters is that they were prosecuted because doing so was against the law. Such a claim may, for instance, include the argument that others of various ages, races, religions, or genders committed the same criminal offences for which the defendant is being tried but were not charged, and therefore the defendant is only being pursued due to discrimination.

Rationale behind Selective Prosecution

A selective prosecution petition seeks a court to exert its judicial jurisdiction over a 'special province' of the Executive. Selective prosecution is not a defence to the criminal accusation itself. If a prosecutor made a decision using an unconstitutional justification, the information serves as the foundation for a motion to dismiss. The assertion is supported by equal protection criteria. It is necessary for the defendant to demonstrate both the discriminatory effects of the prosecutorial policy and its discriminatory motivations.

A selective prosecution begins with an assumption of prosecutorial good faith and constitutional compliance. To establish that the prosecutor's actions violated the Constitution then clear evidence to the contrary must be presented. The Supreme Court has been reluctant to let the court to overturn a prosecution judgement, nevertheless, because the claim calls for the judiciary to examine the executive's actions.

Elements of Selective Prosecution

The following are the elements −

• An individual must demonstrate both a discriminatory intent and a discriminatory result of a prosecutorial policy in order to establish selective prosecution.

• They must demonstrate that prosecutors did not file charges against individuals of other races who were in a comparable situation.

United States vs. Armstrong: Selective Prosecution Standard (517 U.S. 456 (1996)

The threshold that must be fulfilled to acquire discovery in a claim of selective prosecution based on race was discussed in United States vs. Armstrong. After selling crack cocaine to undercover agents seven times, and after the police searched their hotel room and discovered more crack and a loaded gun, the defendants, Armstrong and Hampton, were taken into custody by agents from the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and the local police department's narcotics division.

The defendants were charged with conspiracy to distribute more than fifty grams of cocaine, conspiring to possess with the purpose of distributing more than fifty grams of cocaine, and violating federal weapon laws. They filed a petition for discovery or for the indictment to be dismissed following the indictment, claiming that they were singled out for federal prosecution due to their race. The defendants filed an affidavit from a "Paralegal Specialist" at the Office of the Federal Public Defender in support of the motion, which stated that all twenty-four crack cocaine prosecutions that were concluded in 1991 included defendants who were African-Americans.

The court emphasised that although a prosecutor's choice to file charges is subject to review, selective prosecution requires that the defendant make the required threshold showing. The court decided that in order to prove selective prosecution, the defendant must demonstrate that the federal prosecutorial policy "had a discriminatory impact and that it was motivated by a discriminatory intent," in accordance with equal protection criteria.

Conclusion

Selective prosecution keeps defendants away from getting a fair deal. It is challenging for the majority of criminal defendants to demonstrate the necessary discriminatory purpose since there is no precise definition of "discriminatory intent," which must be demonstrated in a selective prosecution allegation. The answer to the question of how to establish discriminatory intent in a case of selective prosecution based on race. The courts used to its burden-shifting mechanism, which gives the legal system a crucial tool for identifying evidence of selective prosecution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. Who has the right to prosecute?

Ans. Any person may act as the prosecutor either directly or through a pleader. Hence, if the Magistrate Court grants him permission, the victim, complainant, or his attorney may be authorised to handle the prosecution in a case that is now before the court.

Q2. What is the difference between prosecution and prosecutor?

Ans. A prosecutor is a legal representative of the prosecution in governments that use either the common law adversarial system or the civil law inquisitorial system. In a criminal trial, the prosecution is the party legally tasked with making its case against the defendant who is alleged to have broken the law.

Q3. What are the major duties of the prosecutors?

Ans. The goal of prosecutors is to decide whether to prosecute a case and what charges to bring. Before they prepare the cases and present them in court, they serve as the police's advisors throughout the early phases of a criminal investigation.