Jury procedure is not a special procedure, it is the main procedure

Jury Session Development Problems: Comparative Aspects. They discussed modern challenges and prospects for jury development. The resource persons analyzed the development experiences of jury institutions in Russia, the United States, Canada, Kazakhstan and other countries. Doctor of Law, Lawyer for the Province of Ontario (Canada) Nikolai Kovalev touched on the topic of world trends in the field of jury trials, talking about the conditions for the successful functioning of this institution.

According to him, there are several positive trends in the institutional development of juries in several countries, but unfortunately there is no need to discuss positive trends on a global scale. For example, the United States is trying to stimulate citizen participation in jury trials by introducing an innovative method of encouragement – jury appreciation (as well as reducing “delivery days” to one or two). We can also talk about the prospect of introducing jury trials in countries that have not previously implemented them. In Taiwan, a proposal to introduce a jury trial has been under consideration for the past few years. trial services in Oklahoma Asian countries are gradually starting to understand the benefits of operating such a court.

Another important contradictory trend is the gradual transformation from jury trial to mixed court. In Japan, mixed collegiate was introduced, but the percentage of exemption did not increase. In France, when a jury is replaced by a mixed jury, the percentage of exemptions is even halved. Part of the constraint on the development of the jury trials was the government’s wary attitude towards them, which it observed, including in Georgia.

When asked about the possibility and prospect of being elected as a peace judge, Kovalev replied that only in the case of free and alternative elections this system would increase the role of the judiciary. If elections were held as in Soviet times, when there was one candidate elected by everyone, this route would be ineffective. It is also important that elected judges do not yield to popular opinion and make decisions according to “justice by law” and not under “people’s justice”.

Speaking of jury trials in civil proceedings, the speaker noted that the jury is practically not involved in civil cases. The exceptions are the United States and Canada, but the percentage of such cases is small there. In the United States, this possibility was enshrined in the seventh amendment of the Constitution, according to which any claim of $ 20 or more could be tried by a jury (now, considering the price level, $ 75,000). The main issue, which is important to emphasize, in this dispute is the issue of jury pay. If the parties want it, why not.

During the round table session, the participants actively asked questions to the speaker and made proposals. One of the issues raised in the event was the problem of “motivation”. “Motivation” appears to be a positive phenomenon, and it can be said that it is in Russian law. However, it seems impossible to sue such work from a jury, because a reasoned decision, for example, of a Canadian judge set on 100 pages, with reference to precedent and legal doctrine, while 12 jurors, having come to a conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the defendant , it is impossible to unite and be agreed upon. “Motivation”.