“The jury system is a thing of the past and must be abolished”. Identify and evaluate two reforms or alternatives to the jury system.
The jury system has been an integral part of the legal system for a reasonably prolonged period of time, in the time that it has been utilised; it has achieved relative success in resolving trials. To say that it is a ‘thing of the past’ and needs to be abolished completely is a gross overstatement, and untrue. Whilst the jury system may appear to have several flaws when it comes to resolving disputes and cases, the fact that it is able to achieve an appropriate resolution is a positive; however, several reformulations can take place which may improve the way in which the jury system operates.
Firstly, juries could be required to give reasons for their decisions, as opposed to finding a straight answer with no explanation given for their judgement. This therefore makes the jury more accountable as the accused in a criminal trial, and the parties involved in a civil trial are notified of the reasons given and why the jury acted in such a way to find their verdict. Consequently, this enables the parties involved to acknowledge whether attention was given to the actual points of law and facts of the case as opposed to just basing decisions on moral opinions, which therefore leads to greater confidence (or not if it was not based on the facts) in the system. However, this can also be seen in a way that portrays this reform as a negative. If jurors are not required to give reasons, then they are able to take into account wider considerations than the law, and matters of evidence which may lead to a more ‘just’ decision being developed on behalf of the community. Furthermore, it may also lead to jurors feeling a relatively significant burden to summarise the thoughts of 11(criminal) other jurors who may have arrived at the same decision for differing reasons. Giving reasons also gives leeway to appeals being made in respect to the deliberation given by the jury, as they may not have based their judgement on the facts, and rather did so on the basis of external influences which were not present in the case.
Reducing the number of challenges and individuals who are excused from jury duty may also be an effective way in which to increase participation rates. Within criminal trials, parties are given the right to challenge a maximum of 6 jurors without giving an appropriate reason. Peremptory challenges therefore have the potential to reduce the cross-sectional aspect of the jury system and give parties the opportunity to advantage their own case by removing jurors which may compromise it. As a result of exemptions, sections of society are not represented appropriately, and thus do not reflect a true cross-section of the community. An example is that individuals who are involved in the legal profession are deemed to be exempt. If individuals who were experienced in the law were able to sit on juries, the facts of the case would be paid closer attention to, and therefore a more correct resolution is likely to be achieved. However, when individuals are forced to do something, they are most likely not going to be willing to give their best effort to the task at hand, this can be closely correlated to the situation which is likely to take place if individuals are forced to participate in juries. The major negative aspect associated with increasing the participation in juries is that those in the legal profession may influence others that are making a decision, and that individuals with the genuine need to be excused are unable to do so.
In conclusion, the jury system can be perceived as an extremely beneficial aspect of our legal system, it encapsulates the need for society’s values to be reflected within the law and how it is actively imposed within the community. The jury system is not a thing of the past, and definitely does not need to be abolished, but merely needs to adjust to the difficulties that may come about from its usage. Instead of removing an integral part of the legal system, the jury system needs to be strengthened.