U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Lay Participation in Criminal Trials: A Comparative Perspective

NCJ Number
178417
Journal
International Criminal Justice Review Volume: 8 Dated: 1998 Pages: 74-94
Author(s)
Yue Ma
Date Published
1998
Length
21 pages
Annotation
Lay participation in criminal trials through the use of juries, lay judges, and other lay personnel is examined in the United States, England, France, Germany, Italy, China, and Russia.
Abstract
The discussion notes that a form of lay participation existed in ancient Greece more than 2,000 years ago and that the jury trial system came to England through the Norman Conquest in A.D. 1066. However, the 20th century has experienced a gradual decline of lay people in criminal matters. France, Germany, Italy, and other continental European countries abandoned the all-lay jury in the first part of this century in favor of the mixed court of professional and lay judges. England has modified the rigid forms of the traditional model of the jury trial. China once constitutionally guaranteed the system of people's assessors, but this system is no longer constitutionally or legally required. Russia introduced the jury trial into its traditional inquisitorial trial structure following the disintegration of the Soviet Union; it is too early to predict whether this system will succeed. The United States is now the only country that still uses the lay jury with enthusiasm and strives hard to preserve the purity of the adversary system. However, overreliance on the lay jury as fact finder, coupled with excessive judicial passivity and attorney domination of the trial process, can hinder the prompt and reliable adjudication of guilt. The United States should modify its system by reducing the extensive authority given to attorneys and by giving judges the authority to comment on the weight and relevance of the evidence. These changes would change the trial focus to the discovery of truth, thereby increasing the efficiency of the jury trial system and restoring public confidence in jury justice. Footnotes and 64 references

Downloads

No download available

Availability