Is removing the right to a trial by jury unconstitutional?

Jury trial is a concept that has been around since Ancient Greece. It is one of the cornerstones of our legal system having been around since we realised that submerging people in water to see whether they sank or floated was not the best way of establishing a person’s guilt. So why once again is its existence being debated just as it was 12 years ago when Jack Straw tried and failed to abolish Defendant’s right to choose a trial by jury.

There are now proposals by ministers supported by the Magistrates Association to cut the number of cases where a Defendant can elect a trial by jury to save costs. The ‘fast justice’ as demonstrated by the quick convictions after the riots is being held up as an example of how well and cost effectively the system could work. Only minor crimes or ‘summary offences’ are currently only tried by the Magistrates Court only, such as public order offences, and the Magistrates Court has limited sentencing powers. The most serious offices, murder, manslaughter and robbery etc are sent straight to the Crown Court and are dealt with by jury trial.

It is thought that the cases that hover in the middle, the triable either way offences such as theft, will be mostly affected by the proposals.

A compete abolition of jury trials is not something I can envisage happening any time soon. A trial by jury is seen as check and balance against the powers of the State and the Judiciary. A Defendant is tried by his peers, a cross section of society, rather than being at the whim of one (typically a white male and middle-aged) Judge, so is deemed to be fair. It also involves society in the legal process and is seen by many as a fundamental part of our constitution, having being detailed in the Magna Carta in 1215.

However, the process is far from flawless. Yes it is expensive and as someone who has had the pleasure of doing jury service, I was a little bit shocked at the lack of understanding of the basics in some quarters and the attitudes and dynamics that developed in others but on the whole I did find the process to be rewarding as did others I know that have undertook their civic duty.

A common statistic is that there are more acquittals with trial by jury than in the magistrates. This may not be because a jury is more reluctant to convict as a rule but the  fear of ensuring you are ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ does affect some jurors or it may simply be that the bigger the crime the bigger the miscarriage of justice if the decision is wrong! So is this necessarily a criticism?

The issues with jury trials have always been the same and the process has survived as I’m sure it will but it remains to be seen how many less cases make it to the Crown Court in the future in the constant battle to save costs.