Are Juryless Trials the Future?

Last year there was much debate on the idea of juryless trials, as Scotland sought to bring them in via a pilot in 2028 for rape cases, after new legislation was timetabled addressing this. After much debate there were plans for two lay members to sit alongside a judge in these trials. Introducing them it was hoped would eliminate the myths that jurors may have held that have led to a low level of convictions for these types of offences. Whilst general conviction rates in Scotland stand at around 88%, the conviction rate for rape offences overall is at about 50%, whilst for single complainer rape offences it is as low as 24%. However, these are notoriously difficult cases which will often rely on the testimony of just two people without any independent evidence such as CCTV and therefore the low conviction rate for these type of offences may be in part attributable to this.

With fierce opposition from the legal sector and a lack of parliamentary support, there were also concerns that this proposal was a breach of human rights Article 6, that everyone has the right to a fair hearing. It can also be seen to go against a democratic system of criminal justice of trial by ones peers. Eventually the idea of juryless trials was abandoned in Scotland, but it has since been mooted elsewhere.

Sir Brian Leveson has been tasked by the Labour government to review the criminal court system and has similarly put forward the idea of juryless trials. These would be heard in a new intermediate court, sitting between the magistrates and Crown Court, where cases would be overseen by a judge and two magistrates for mid-level crimes which could include such things as drug dealing. Although being introduced in an effort to address the court backlog of cases, there have been concerns over whether this is justified, to remove such a longstanding part of the criminal justice system. There are also concerns over whether this could be resourced with magistrates workload increasing and that any investment put into this may be better spent resourcing the existing court system and safeguarding jury trials.

Questions to consider

-As well as being judged by ones peers, what other advantages are there to juries?

-Who can sit on a jury?

-How can someone avoid jury service?