The amendment of the Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code in 2010 formalised the plea-bargaining process and introduced two new sections, 172C and 172D. The new procedures are intended to reduce the backlog of cases in the criminal courts and as a swift alternative to a full criminal trial. However, the law in action does not appear to be in line with the law in the statute book because currently the actors involved in the process are avoiding the use of the new procedural law. Instead, those actors are following the old informal practice of plea-bargaining to achieve their personal goals which may be inconsistent with the organisational goals of the judiciary and prosecution. This paper adopts a qualitative methodology, in which the primary data is obtained from semi-structured interviews with twenty respondents comprising the stakeholders in the criminal justice system.

中文翻译：

---

当法律与实践发生冲突时：马来西亚认罪谈判程序的实施

2010 年马来西亚刑事诉讼法修正案使辩诉交易程序正式化，并引入了两个新部分，172C 和 172D。新程序旨在减少刑事法院积压的案件，并作为全面刑事审判的快速替代方案。然而，现行法律似乎与成文法书中的法律不一致，因为目前参与该过程的行为者正在避免使用新的程序法。相反，这些行为者正在遵循旧的、非正式的辩诉交易做法来实现他们的个人目标，这可能与司法和检控的组织目标不一致。本文采用定性方法，