DP5 Inclusive juries Flashcards
What were the reasons for law reform?
The Juries Act 2000 (Vic) does not reflect the values and attitudes of modern society as it does noy specifically exclude people who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind or have low vision from serving on a jury. However it does prevent people with a physical disability that can render a person incapable of performing duties of jury services from serving on a jury.
Furthermore, the 13th person rule prevents anyone who is not a juror from being present in the jury room.
When did the investigation begin?
11th march 2020
What is the information about the investigation?
It was not referred to the VLRC by the attorney-General, and was a community inquiry from the VLRC, where it drafted its own terms of reference. The terms of reference state that the VLRC needed to examine the current legal framework to consider if legislative change was required, and if practical supports needed to be added in specific circumstances where jury services should be limited. No due date was set.
What was part of the investigation?
The VLRC reviewed current law and conducted research into how other jurisdictions approach jury services, such as the UK and USA where people with disabilities served on a jury. They held 29 online consultations speaking to those who were affected by disabilities, and received 14 submissions and 27 survey responses.
What did the submissions include?
Adjustments, such as amendments to the jury call out document, blindness awareness training to all court staff, the use of guide dogs, assistance with movement to and from the court room ad adaptive technology and format for those that need it.
Some argued that having people who were blind, deaf, hard of hearing or low vision on a jury increased the representative nature of the community and vires in deliberations.
Furthermore, academics argued that it must not affect the accused’s right to a fair trial, and thus there are some cases here a person with a specific disability cannot serve.
When was the final report delivered?
July 2022 to the Attorney-General
What were the recommendations?
53, consisting of:
Juries act should be amended to courts must provide reasonable adjustments to enable jury service (e.g Aslan interpreters and support persons, assistance animals and hearing loop). As well as clarifying that the 13th person rule does not apply to Aslan interpreters and support persons.
It also suggested that the final decision as to if a person is able to serve on a jury in a particular trial should be made by the judge. The judge must consider a range of factors, such as the types of evidence presented.
Finally, it suggested that court staff, judges and lawyers should be required to undertake disability awareness training.
Add more about strengths and weaknesses!!!
