IN THE eyes of the law, members of a jury are the epitome of the reasonable man or woman. But when participation in jury service is limited because some people are excused from the role, then a right to trial by a jury of one’s peers becomes harder to secure. Justice may well be denied where the selection process does not involve a representative cross-section of the community, especially when society is rapidly changing.
The Law Reform Commission has identified a clear defect in present arrangements and, in a consultation paper, has proposed changes to the law regulating juries. If the Government legislates accordingly, juries would become more representative of society and of the middle class in particular. This would redress a serious imbalance and would see justice better served.
The last major reform of jury legislation in 1976 quickly followed a successful constitutional challenge to the Juries Act, 1927. That law automatically excluded women from jury service unless first, they had applied to serve and second, they also had the necessary property qualification. Juries drawn from a panel that, in effect, excluded women – who make up half the adult population – could not be regarded as truly representative of society. However, the defects of the 1927 legislation were only partly remedied by the subsequent reforms.
The Juries Act, 1976 listed many categories of persons, particularly in the professions, who could be excused from jury service; a right that most have exercised. That exemption list ranges from doctors, dentists and nurses to university lecturers, teachers and full-time students. TDs, senators, members of the clergy and those aged over 65 are also included. Serious doubts have been expressed about the constitutional justification for such extensive exclusions.
The Law Reform Commission has recommended that these automatic exemptions should be replaced by a system of individual pleas to be excused for “good cause”. As commission president Mrs Justice Catherine McGuinness has pointed out, those categories of persons “who are excusable should have a proper excuse if they are not going to serve on a jury”.
Without increased middle class involvement – which means a larger professional presence on jury panels – jury service will not be fully representative of the wider community. To share in the administration of justice is a civic responsibility. It is difficult to understand, or justify, why so many choose to opt out of performing what most citizens regard as their civic duty.