Lawyers will finally see the inside of the jury room from spring next year when the automatic exemption of the profession from jury service is lifted, new draft guidance revealed last week.
Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, solicitors, barristers and even judges will form part of the selection pool for jury duty from April 2004.
Like other registered electors, solicitors will have to show 'good reason' in order to be excused of their civic duty.
However, under proposed new guidance put out for consultation by the Department for Constitutional Affairs last week, lawyers may also apply to be excused if they think it is very likely that they will know - or be known to - anyone involved in the conduct of the trial.
Solicitors will have to notify the officials immediately if they realise when they arrive at court that they know someone involved in the trial to which they are assigned, or that they have some connection with the trial that could threaten its fairness.
This is already the case for anyone sitting as a juror.
Rodney Warren, director of the Criminal Law Solicitors Association, said: 'From a criminal lawyer's perspective, most lawyers will relish the prospect of being part of the jury and seeing how the jury operates, it could be a valuable learning experience'.
In expanding the class of potential jurors to the legal profession, the government rejected arguments that lawyers might exert undue influence over fellow jurors without specialist knowledge of the legal system.
Mr Warren said: 'Most people on the jury will be concerned to make sure they have their input.'
Law Society chief executive Janet Paraskeva said the inclusion of lawyers on juries raised concerns, such as the 'great risk that their professional knowledge of the behind-the-scenes workings could unduly influence other members of a jury'.
Alternatively, some jurors could react against lawyers on the panel.
'The inclusion of police officers and lawyers might also affect the public's perception of the fairness of juries,' she added.
Rachel Rothwell
(See [2003] Gazette, 11 December, 10)
No comments yet