If America wants to protect its world-class democracy, Michael Flynn should face prison

In an investigation that hinges on protecting the basic principles of democracy and justice, letting offenders off the hook for being helpful sends a dangerous message

US prosecutors have recommended Donald Trump’s former national security adviser should not receive a prison sentence – despite the fact he has admitted lying to the FBI – because he has provided so much assistance to investigators looking into links between Russia and the Trump campaign. Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying at the end of last year, and at that time Robert Mueller, the man leading the probe into Russia’s influence on the 2016 election, said Flynn could face a six-month sentence. The maximum penalty for lying to the FBI is five years in prison.

Now it looks like Flynn will avoid doing any prison time at all.

The reasoning is easy to grasp: Flynn, after reading the political runes, decided to make himself useful to the federal investigation into collusion with Russia, and leniency is his reward.

But the message this sends should give prosecutors pause for thought. Not only did Flynn lie to the FBI, he lied to protect the presidential office from facing justice. That shows a complete disregard for democracy, and a dangerous adherence to the view some people, by virtue of their political status, are above the law. The issue is compounded when you consider that, if US democracy is to be respected, those who seek to lead should be subject to the highest scrutiny.

This entire FBI investigation hinges on establishing whether, and to what extent, the election process – the basic tenet of a modern democracy – was tampered with. The special counsel should avoid any appearance of further fiddling with judicial norms. Allowing any of the parties to this alleged crime to walk away without serving time indicates to the American people it is not considered by the establishment to be a serious offence after all. In Flynn’s case it seems that, as long as you come clean and say you’re sorry afterwards, lying to the FBI is no big deal. As a disincentive to would-be offenders, that’s not very effective.

Meanwhile, it’s already been pointed out Flynn’s usefulness as a witness is tainted by his admission of lying. It won’t have had an impact on his ability to help out with the investigation, but the testimony of an avowed liar is not going to be particularly helpful if any related probe leads to a trial.

This will all have been taken into consideration, of course; plea deals are standard procedure in the US. A common argument in their favour is that their use can speed up the legal process. However, the major downside is it can end up looking like justice has simply not been served.

So, what do we know? Flynn is guilty of lying to the FBI, and he did not offer up his admission until after the investigation began. He did not have a moral awakening and turn himself in to federal investigators.

The help Flynn has provided to the investigation should not go unrecognised, but it would better reflected in a prison sentence that comes in at the lower end of the range normally handed out for such crimes. No time whatsoever is hardly fair: if admitting to a crime absolved the perpetrator, there would be no need for a legal system.

Worst of all, the surprise decision makes a mockery of the globally admired US democratic and justice system. The delicate calculation taken on the negotiation of this plea deal was simply a mistake.