Author Martin Yant discusses the use of coercion in pleadings: « These defendants are making the most important decision of their lives whether or not to plead guilty, » Grossman said. They will be told what they will get if they plead guilty. But they are not told what they receive when they go to court. So they make the decision with half a basket of information they need to make an informed decision. Plea Bargaining is extremely difficult in civil courts. This is because, unlike common law systems, civil law systems have no concept of plea – if the accused confesses; a confession is included as evidence, but the Public Prosecutor`s Office is not exempted from the obligation to present a full case. A court may decide that an accused is innocent, even if he has made a full confession. Unlike common law systems, prosecutors in civil law countries may have limited or no power to drop or reduce charges after a case has been filed, and in some countries their power to drop or reduce charges before a case is filed is limited, making it impossible to negotiate pleadings. Since the 1980s, many civil law nations have adapted their systems to allow for pleadings.  In some common law jurisdictions, such as Singapore and the Australian state of Victoria, pleadings are conducted only to the extent that the prosecution and the defence can agree that the accused pleads guilty to certain charges or reduced charges, in exchange for the prosecutor withdrawing the remaining or more serious charges. In New South Wales, a 10-25% discount on the sentence is usually granted in exchange for an early admission of guilt, but this concession should be granted by the judge in order to recognise the utilitarian value of an early admission of guilt to the judicial system – it will never be negotiated with a prosecutor.
 The courts of these legal systems have made it clear that they will always decide what the appropriate sentence will be. There are no criminal sanctions trials between the prosecution and the defense. . . .