But Espino’s experience highlights a potential flaw in the process: the judges who decide whether to approve the deals are unable to consider whether the agreed facts that underpin the agreements are true. Those agreed facts are decided upon solely by the accused company and prosecutors. “When presented with a remediation agreement, a court must accept the facts as exposed by the prosecutor and the accused organization,” David wrote. In court, Crown prosecutors stood behind the agreed statement of facts. “When presented with a remediation agreement, a court must accept the facts as exposed by the prosecutor and the accused organization,” David ruled.
