ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the issues of legal principle and policy arising from agreements to terminate or defer prosecution, critically reviewing the 'payoffs' and 'pitfalls' of using such agreements to deal with serious corporate crime. In the United States and United Kingdom, the advent of deferred prosecution agreements, or deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs), has been heralded as another valuable tool for regulators, and the adoption of a DPA scheme is currently under consideration in Australia. However, the purposes and principles governing DPA schemes remain nascent and ill-defined. The chapter calls for the adoption of a more principled approach to deferred prosecution, one that prioritises preventive justice over regulatory pragmatism and expediency. It explores the preventive potential of DPA schemes, and how current law and practice may be realigned to prioritise prevention or minimisation of harms by corporations, and, where that proves impossible, to ensure adequate redress and compensation.
