MOJO
  • Home
  • About
  • News
  • Contact
  • Comment
  • Testimonials
  • Donate
jury2
April 16 2020

Abolition of juries back on the table

Euan Comment, News

Having been forced, just last month, to withdraw its remarkable proposal to abolish juries in solemn trials, the Scottish Government has now resurrected the idea in new proposals for the administration of justice during the coronavirus crisis.  

In a discussion document published on Tuesday (14 April), nine options are identified as potential solutions to the difficulties caused by the public health emergency.  In respect of seven of these, the document expresses either no view, or doubt as to their suitability and/or practicability.  Of the two remaining options, which the document goes to significant lengths to justify, one is the abolition of juries in solemn trials.  Curiously, given its detailed endorsement of the proposal, the document suggests that this is “not considered to be the preferred option of the Scottish Government”.  The other remaining option, which presumably is the preferred option, is a proposal to significantly increase the sentencing powers of sheriffs sitting without a jury.  Which amounts, broadly, to the same thing.

So, what’s the problem with abolishing juries?  To read the discussion paper, you would be forgiven for thinking that it’s no big thing.   To read some of the commentators in the press and on social media you would, again, be forgiven for thinking that it’s no big thing.   But it is.  It really is.   The justification for trial by jury isn’t simply that we’ve had this for 600 years – although you might see that as illustrative of a system whose value has been tried and tested and that has served us, in the main, well.   It is that juries are a fundamental, and essential, foundation of our contract, as individuals, with the state.  It is a cornerstone of our democracy that we are subject to the rule of law by our consent.   We empower the state to prosecute, and imprison, on the understanding that we will be judged, at least in the most serious crimes with the most serious penalties, by the people.  Not by the state.  Where a judge – who, like the prosecutor, is an employed officer of the state – is the arbiter of guilt or innocence then that essential distinction is lost.  It is, in fact, reversed.   To this observer, it just doesn’t get any more fundamental than that.   What is being proposed here is an attack on our democracy.  It is the appropriation of unfettered power, by stealth.

Juries aren’t perfect.  Nothing devised and administered by humans is, or can be.  But they’re better than the alternative.   Juries are an inconvenience to governments for whom conviction rates are electoral capital.   Without juries, governments are more powerful, because they control the entire justice process.  Without juries, citizens are less free.

And history suggests that when freedoms and protections are withdrawn, they can be very difficult to recover.   Consider the example of France.  Juries were established there during the revolution, in 1790, and retained under the Napoleonic Code of 1804, on which French law continues to be based.   It took the arrival of the Wehrmacht to see them abolished, in 1941.  The Republic was, of course, restored, at the end of hostilities.   The juries never were.   The point?  Even democratic governments can’t be trusted with our basic rights and freedoms.

The Scottish Government announcement can be found HERE.

The discussion paper can be found HERE.

Whatever happened to investigative journalism? Volunteering at MOJO

Related Posts

Guildford 4

News

Birmingham bombings inquest whitewash repeated at Guildford

The decision by the coroner at the Birmingham bombings inquest to exclude from scrutiny the very matters that might have allowed the victims’ families some degree of closure – a decision that also denied justice to Paddy Hill and the other unwitting victims of the atrocity – rendered that exercise effectively pointless and, depending on […]

3990

News

Prisoners denied access to forensic evidence in bid to prove their innocence

For miscarriage of justice victims looking to overturn their wrongful convictions, one of the most significant challenges they encounter is the refusal of police and Crown to allow access to crucial evidence that could fatally undermine the case against them. From The Guardian online yesterday (10 July), we reproduce an interesting article that highlights this […]

community

News

MOJO Community Project Launches

The MOJO Aftercare and Reintegration Team are pleased to report the successful, long-awaited launch of our MOJO Community Project. The MOJO Community is an extension of our client-led reintegration programme which aims to bring clients together to seek to mitigate the consequences of wrongful imprisonment and to offer an alternative to commonly encountered feelings of […]

Latest Tweets

  • We reproduce this article by Samuel Osbourne from the Independant 30 May 2019. mojoscotland.org/carbon-credits…
    4 years ago
  • We reproduce here a worrying piece from the Guardian from 29 May 2019 by Sian Cain about austerity and it’s potenti… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
    4 years ago
  • There is a debate on going regarding the not proven verdict in Scotland. In an article from the Times, Gordon Jacks… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
    4 years ago
→ Follow us

Archives

Search

  • Home
  • About
  • News
  • Contact
  • Comment
  • Testimonials
  • Privacy Notice
© Miscarriages of Justice Organisation (Scotland) 2023 - Company No SC239555 - Registered Charity No SC033820 The work of MOJO is financially supported by the Scottish Government