---

Citizen-only juries 'a public confidence risk' – Bar

A submission from the Bar of Ireland has called for non-citizens to be allowed to serve on juries.

The barristers’ body has, however, has come out against a proposal for a fee to be paid to jurors to compensate them for expenses incurred during jury service.

The submission, based on views from members of the Council of the Bar of Ireland and the Criminal State Bar Committee, is a response to a Department of Justice consultation paper on jury reform.

Demographic changes

The Bar says that the Juries Act 1976 remains largely unchanged, and warrants “serious consideration” in the light of developments such as the internet’s impact on information access, high juror attrition rates, and demographic changes.

Supporting proposals to open up jury service to non-citizens, it backs a proposal made by the Law Reform Commission (LRC) in 2013 for a residency requirement of at least five years for jury-service eligibility.

“The courts increasingly see non-national, non-citizen defendants come before them yet, other than the inclusion of persons over the age of 70, the pool of potential jurors has remains unchanged since 1976 and is not reflective of today’s population.

“A jury composed exclusively of citizens risks undermining public confidence in the justice system’s fairness when trying non-citizen defendants,” the Bar submission states.

Peremptory challenges

The organisation believes that a residency requirement would address concerns that jurors from countries with “starkly different” cultural, societal, and legal backgrounds would not be able to deliberate properly and fairly in accordance with Irish law. 

The Bar also suggests that expending jury eligibility could alleviate high rates of jury attrition.

Its submission supports the retention of peremptory challenges to jurors, saying that their removal “could lead to dissatisfaction and claims of unfair trials based on jury composition”.

The Bar adds that introducing guidelines or judicial oversight for peremptory challenges would “contradict their purpose: to empower the defence and prosecution independently”.

Juror capacity

The submission supports individual assessments of juror capacity, stating that they would provide both the prosecution and defence with greater clarity on whether a potential juror can fulfil their duties.

The Bar raises concerns about section 9(1) of the 1976 act, which lists individuals who are excused from jury service as of right, such as medical professionals, teachers, and full-time students. 

“This broad excusal results in juror pools that fail to represent a cross-section of society,” it says.

The Bar supports LRC proposals to address potential intimidation of juries – including limits on access to jury lists.

Risk of ‘monetising’ service

On fees for jurors, the submission notes that judges frequently excuse jurors on grounds of financial hardship, effectively excluding people such as small-business owners or those on low incomes.

It points out, however, that jury service is a civic duty, and warns that a flat fee “risks monetising jury service, potentially altering jurors’ attitudes”.

The Bar calls for other measures, such as reimbursing vouched out-of-pocket expenses, to alleviate potential financial burdens.