An Endangered Species?: The Future of the Irish Criminal Jury System in Light of Taxquet v. Belgium
| DOI | 10.1177/203228441000100205 |
| Date | 01 June 2010 |
| Published date | 01 June 2010 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
New Journal of Eur opean Crimina l Law, Vol. 1, Issue 2, 2010 153
ARTICLES
An enDAngeReD sPeCIes?: tHe FUtURe
oF tHe IRIsH CRIMInAL JURy systeM
In LIgHt oF TAxqueT v. Belgium
T D*
“Jury tri al in Ireland has always been regarded as a f undamental par t of Irish demo cracy
and as inspiring condence on the par t of the public in the conduc t of cri minal
proceedings… [It] is the una nimous choice of accused pers ons and of defence and human
rights lawyers a nd is viewed as a cornerstone of the cri minal legal system.”1
1. INTRODUCTION
e topic of criminal jury reform has simmered in Ireland for some time – in academic
discourse at least – with va rious proposals for reform made over the yea rs. Almost
without except ion, commentators have a dvocated improvements to the current
crimina l jury system (e.g. by providi ng jurors with more guidance as to their role),2
rather th an considering change s to the st ructure of t he system itself.3 Ocial
consideration of the jury system has followed a similar approach: the Law Reform
Commission’s recent Consultation Paper on Jury Service, published in March 2010, is
* Executive Lega l Ocer to the Chief Justice of Ireland. is materi al was rst published by omson
Reuters (Professional) Limite d as Tom Daly, “An Endangere d Spec ies? e Future of the Irish
Crimina l Jury System in light of Taxquet v Belgium”, (2010) 2 Irish Crimin al Law Jou rnal and is
reproduced by agreement w ith the P ublishers, w ith some tex tual ame ndments and additions. Al l
views expresse d in this article, and responsibi lity for any errors or omissions, are the author’s alone.
anks are due to Jan Reckendor , Professor Ma r Jimeno-Bulne s and Profes sor Valerie Han s for
providing rese arch material reques ted.
1 ird Party Observation s of the G overnment of Irelan d, Taxquet v. Belgium, 25 Septem ber 200 9
(hereinaer “I rish observation s”) p. 3.
2 See Ge aróid Carey, “Jury Reform and Lord Justice Auld ’s Criminal Courts Rev iew–Implications for
Ireland” (2000) 8 Irish Law Times 122; John L. O’Donne ll, “e Jury on Trial: Ree ctions on DPP
–v– Haugh” (200 0) 5 (9) Bar Review 470; omas O’Malley, “A Representative and Impartial Jur y”
(2003) 8 (6) Bar Revie w 232; James Jeers, “e Representative a nd Impartia l Jury in the Criminal
Trial: An Achiev able Reality in Ire land today?” (2008) 18(2) Irish Criminal L aw Journal 34.
3 A nota ble exception is O’Hanlon, “ e Sacred Cow of Trial by Jury ” (1990–92) Irish Jurist 5 7.
Tom Daly
154 Intersentia
the rst ocial publication on jury reform since 1965,4 but is devoted solely to t he
qualication and eligibilit y criteria applied in selecting persons for jury service, rather
than an overa rching review of the operation of the jury system.5 Should the
recommendations in this paper be followed, to ensure that juries are more representative
of the population as a whole and t hat persons are not inequitably d isqualied from
jury servic e, the Irish criminal jury sy stem will certainly be improved and jurie s will,
as one commentator has put it, “never look the same again”.6
However, t he Europea n Cour t of Human Rights’ decision of January 2009 in
Taxquet v Belgium,7 indicating that juries must give reasons for their verdicts in order
to comply with t he right to a fair tri al in Article 6(1) of the European C onvention on
Human Rights, raises the prospe ct that the centuries-old Irish criminal jury may
require more profound and fa r-reaching reform to satisfy the ex igencies of the
Convention. With the nal judgment in Ta x qu e t pending before t he Grand Chamber
of the Court in Strasbourg, this article asks whet her we are faci ng the end of the
crimina l jury as we know it in Ireland, and if so, what form it may take i n the future.
2. THE IRISH JURY SYSTEM IN CONTEXT
2.1. CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS
Trial by jury in crim inal cases is guara nteed by Article 38.5 of the Irish Constitut ion,
which states: “… no person shall be tried on any criminal char ge without a jury.” is
is subject to three li mited exceptions set out in Article 38.2– 4: (i) minor oences may
be dealt with by a judge sitting without a jury;8 (ii) oences under military law may be
tried by mil itary tribunals sit ting without a jury; a nd (iii) special courts may be us ed
to tr y oences without a ju ry where t he ordinary courts are deemed inadequate to
secure the eect ive administration of justice, and the preser vation of public order.9
In pract ice, most cr iminal oences are not tried by a jury. is is, rst, because
minor oences constitute the vast majority of cri mes that come before the cou rts.
Second, as regards cri minal oences that are not minor, there is no need for a jur y
4 Two reports were published concerni ng the jury system in 1965 by the Committee on Court Pract ice
and Procedur e, chaired by Walsh J of the Supreme Cour t: Second Interi m Report Jury Service (Pr.
8328, March 1965); and Four th Interim Report Ju ry Challenges (Pr. 8577, November 1965).
5 See L aw Reform Commissio n Consultation Paper on Jur y Service (LRC CP 61 – 2010).
6 See Jame s McDer mott, “Upgrade needed for the 12 pe ople goo d and tr ue”, Iris h Inde pendent,
29 March 2010. Available at w ww.independent.ie.
7 Applic ation No. 926/05, decision of the Eu ropean Court of Huma n Rights, Januar y 13, 2009.
8 Mi nor oences are tried in the Distr ict Court. It may be noted that the Constit ution does not dene
what constitutes a minor oence , and the courts tend to test the character of an oence primar ily by
reference to the sever ity of the punishment p ermitted for convict ion of the oence.
9 Spec ial crimina l courts are disc ussed infra.
To continue reading
Request your trial