F. Safeguards ii. Enhanced disclosure requirements 87.  The human rights challenges that trial waiver systems can present to criminal justice systems do not necessarily indicate that the adoption of such systems should not be encouraged. The jurisdictions studied here implement trial waiver systems in a variety of ways, some of which feature important safeguards against the kind of abuses and unintended consequences of plea bargaining in the US identified at the Washington roundtable and in academic literature. The surveys did not specifically ask about safeguards, so comprehensive information is not available. Nonetheless, it is possible to identify some key measures that different jurisdictions are undertaking to try to mitigate the potential dangers of trial waivers. 89.  The problems discussed earlier in relation to the risk of wrongful convictions and poor quality investigations are addressed in some jurisdictions by the requirement for prosecutors to provide more extensive disclosure of evidence before the trial waiver than may have ordinarily occurred at the pre-trial stage in the course of a full trial procedure. Luxembourg, for example, has a specific provision that permits a defendant who has indicated interest in a trial waiver (known as “jugement sur accord”) to be granted access to the full criminal file held by prosecuting authorities. Finland too provides for full disclosure prior to trial waivers (known as “syyteneuvottelu”). i. Mandatory access to a lawyer 88. While there is nearly universal recognition of the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings, there are few if any jurisdictions in which this right is fully realised. Even in jurisdictions considered to have quite robust legal aid systems (such as England and Wales), there are indications that defendants are at times agreeing to waive their right to a trial without having had access to a lawyer. This can be due to practical problems in appointing lawyers (particularly in cases where the defence is publicly funded) at very early stages in the proceedings, or because defendants waive their right to a lawyer. The concerning phenomenon of unrepresented defendants entering trial waivers tends to arise more often in the context of minor offences even though the long-term impact of convictions for minor offences carrying no custodial sentence can be significant. To address these concerns, some jurisdictions, according to the research, insist on the participation of a defence lawyer in order for a trial waiver to be valid. These include (but are not limited to) Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Croatia, Estonia, France, Georgia, Ireland, Luxembourg, Macedonia, South Africa, Switzerland and Zambia. In Kenya, draft prosecutorial guidelines state that if no defence lawyer is present, the negotiations must be electronically recorded, and children may not enter into trial waivers (known as “plea agreements”) without legal representation.99 90.  O ther jurisdictions may not feature disclosure provisions that are specific to the trial waiver system, but have general disclosure regimes that provide defendants with sufficient access to evidence in time to make decisions about trial waivers. For example, in Germany, South Africa, and Spain, survey respondents indicated that defendants receive a copy of all evidence intended to be used at trial before they are asked to make a decision to waive their right to a full trial. iii. Timing of agreements 91. Whether defendants have sufficient access to information, evidence and legal advice depends in part on the timing of the trial waiver. Many jurisdictions, including Australia, England and Wales, and New Zealand, provide greater benefits for trial waivers exercised earlier in the proceedings. The thinking behind this policy is clear; the earlier the agreement, the greater the potential resource savings (though the desire to spare victims further trauma and to encourage defendants to express sincere remorse are also often stated motivations for such a policy). However, the push for greater efficiency at greater speeds comes at the cost of procedural protections. 99. “ODPP Draft Rules on Plea Agreements”, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Jul. 2014). Available at: http://www.kenyalaw.org/kl/ODPP_Draft_Rules_On_ Plea_Bargaining.pdf. 52.