The subject of considerations is an attempt to describe and assess the institution of cessation of prosecution, resulting from reaching an agreement, as reaction to crime. The effective consensus-driven approach ought to be aimed at combining court instruments and values with the axiological basis of agreement-based litigation (namely, principle of restorative justice), and also with legal measures which allow to mete out a due penal reaction or, frequently, the cessation of prosecution. In case of proceedings regarding misdemeanours, where there is a possibility of eliminating the consequences of the crime solely by compensatory actions within victim-perpetrator relation, the state ought to waive the execution of ius puniendi. What should constitute the limit of waiving the right to punish is a combination of circumstances such as: negligible degree of social harm, reaching a plea agreement that includes the manner of compensation, along with executing thereof. Then, the sufficient reaction to crime is redressing damage or compensation for the harm suffered and the prosecutor’s decision to cease prosecution. The stage of judicial proceeding does not have to and should not be merely a forum for reaching and executing court agreements. The described variant of cessation of the prosecution combines instrumental values, such as the promptness and cost-effectiveness of proceedings with non-instrumental ones, such as due process and implementation of restorative justice. Through only partial waiver of the trial subject implementation, cessation of the proceedings may constitute a compromise between legalistic values and those of judicial opportunism.
Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Oklahoma