The Disappearing Trial 73. However, it is not always clear that victims’ interests are routinely served by trial waivers. The Sentencing Council’s own research noted that “not all of the victims who took part supported the idea of offenders receiving a reduced sentence for pleading guilty.”90 Some victims object not only to the reduction in sentence, but also to the perceived loss of the public, truth-seeking function of criminal trials. In New South Wales in Australia, for example, where an informal system of charge incentives has long been tolerated, trial waivers (known as “charge negotiations”) became more formally regulated due to concerns that fact and charge negotiations did not sufficiently respect victims. According to the Phase 1 survey response, in 2001 prosecutors negotiated a plea deal in a highprofile rape case in which the statement of facts agreed upon by the prosecution and the defendants differed substantially from the version of events told by the victims.91 The case received outrage in the media, and led to a review and new guidelines for prosecutors. Similarly, at Fair Trials’ roundtable on trial waiver systems at the Pan-African Lawyers Union Conference in 2016, participants from Kenya suggested that under-use of the trial waiver system was driven in part by concerns about the lack of victim participation in the process. vi. Increasing conviction rates and fighting impunity 74. Another reason given for adopting trial waiver systems is to improve conviction rates (as in Argentina, for example). One prosecutor in South Africa surveyed in Phase 2 of the research specifically stated that trial waivers (known as “plea and sentence agreements”) were useful in boosting performance rates “in courts where judges tend to acquit”. This justification is sometimes framed as the need to use trial waivers to combat impunity. 75. However, as observed earlier in relation to cooperation agreements, where convictions are won through trial waivers in situations where they would not have been possible following trial due to evidentiary weaknesses, loss of public faith in the justice system can result, undermining hoped-for gains in public trust as a result of improved conviction rates. vii. Improving human rights protection 76.  Trial waiver systems have the potential to make a positive impact on human rights protection in criminal proceedings. Crowded court dockets create bottlenecks in case processing that lead to excessive periods of pre-trial detention, a serious and widespread human rights abuse. Trial waivers are often seen as a way to reduce pre-trial detention (as was mentioned for example in the survey from India, and has been noted in relation to Chile and Bolivia, among others), both in individual cases and on a national level. Other jurisdictions have been motivated to introduce a trial waiver system in order to reduce rates of detention overall, and to promote the development of more case-specific, restitution-based sentences. China is considering expanding its trial waiver systems in order to reduce reliance on torture and other unlawful methods of interrogation.92 Nonetheless, without other systematic procedural safeguards for defendants, the confession-based justice system preserved by reliance on trial waivers means that increased respect for human rights in criminal proceedings has not necessarily resulted.93 90. Ibid, p. 9. 91. For a detailed overview of the events and subsequent debate, see Johns, R., “Victims of Crime: Plea Bargains, Compensation, Victim Impact Statements and Support Services”, NSW Parliamentary Library Research Service, Briefing Paper No. 10/02 (Jun. 2002), ss. 7.2.1–7.2.2. Available at:https://www.parliament.nsw.gov. au/researchpapers/Documents/victims-of-crime-plea-bargains-compensation-vict/10-02.pdf. 92. “China Considers Plea Bargaining in Criminal Cases,” Xinhua. (August 29 2016). Available at:http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-08/29/c_135642723.htm 93. Lynch, E. M., “May Be a Plea, but is it a Bargain? An Initial Study of the Use of the Simplified Procedure in China”, Human Rights in China (Apr. 1, 2009). Available at: http://www.hrichina.org/en/content/3703#ft27. 39.