The case for juries

New Zealand will find out early next year if the Government will decrease the number of jury trials in a bid to speed up the court system.
Currently, defendants can choose to face a jury – rather than a judge alone – when charged with a criminal offence carrying a maximum prison sentence of two years or more.
But under the new proposal that threshold would rise to either three, five or seven years. Submissions have just closed and the justice minister is due to report back to Cabinet with proposals for amendments in February 2025.
The minister, Paul Goldsmith, says the current process has been too slow for too long and one of the biggest drivers of delays in our courts, particularly the District Court, is jury trials.
The number of active jury trials has climbed from about 2,000 six years ago to about 3,400 last year, with the average duration of a case from start to finish climbing from 349 days to 498 over the same period.
“This Government is committed to reducing delays in the courts, so people can access timely and fair justice, and move on with their lives.” Goldsmith says.
But defence lawyer Marie Dyhrberg told The Detail she’s fighting the change.
“I prefer jury trials, they definitely affect issues of what is common sense in the everyday person, what are the morals, what’s accepted, and people who are on juries are more likely to have experienced first-hand, or within their family, the issues that come up in a jury trial, more than a judge… who can possibly be seen as removed or elite.
“Clients are much more likely to put their faith in the jury.
“There are no positives to this proposal. It really threatens the fundamental protections under the Bill of Rights. A jury trial is so deep rooted in protections for people who are facing court.”
So, can New Zealand trust judges to be impartial or are they more likely to convict?
“It’s a perception… the trials that I do… it’s not so much a corrupt bias but I know that I can appeal more to the lay person as to why people behave in a particular way and why they don’t. I strike a chord of understanding far more with them than with judges, that’s why I would always prefer a jury trial.”
She believes there could be even more delays if the system is flooded with judge-alone trials.
“With a judge alone, you don’t get the decision at the end of the hearing, judges have to go away, review the evidence and give reasons for that. It takes time.”
She says the Law Society, the Defence Lawyers Association of New Zealand and the Law Association are fighting “strongly hard, very hard” against the proposal.
“These problems and delays are systemic that can be cured. But don’t fiddle around with these incredibly important principles”.
Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.  
You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.