EDITOR, The Tribune
Our justice system makes use of juries in criminal and select civil cases. While I have no problem with the concept of juries in theory, in practice and in our setting, I question their ability to properly administer justice based on the standards of the law. My reasoning is quite simple. A jury is selected randomly from a list of registered voters. We assume, based on their ages and the fact that they are legal adults that they have the mental capacity to arrive at conclusions based on evidence, when in fact one has nothing to do with the other.
The ability to think and reason are not necessarily enhanced with age, as life experience and people’s choices would readily show. The ability to listen to the seemingly endless dialogue of legally trained persons with their highfalutin jargon and extract core arguments for or against a defendant, while formulating an objective opinion is a skill that far too many chosen to be on juries have not acquired.
When we consider that a high percentage of students graduating from high school in this country cannot answer simple questions clearly and concisely or fill out an application form properly, I say that we have a fundamental problem with underdeveloped minds. When you consider that almost 40% of registered voters supported the PLP during the last election, in the face of evidence of gross mismanagement of the economy, implementation of VAT and unchecked government spending, I say we have a problem assessing facts and acting objectively.
When single young women with little to no education or in entry level jobs choose to have children with all the negative social ramifications associated with it, while contraception is readily available, I say we have a problem with deductive reasoning. But yet we ask these same individuals who falter in making routine decisions in their own lives to sit on juries and make far more complicated decisions regarding others without first assessing their ability to reason properly. This is a tremendous blight on the proper administration of justice and does not fulfil the spirit of what the legal system should represent, causing a travesty of justice in too many cases.
Among the criterion for jury selection should be the inclusion of simple tests to assess a juror’s ability to think and arrive at justifiable conclusions based on evidence, not on their personal feelings, experiences or emotions.
If there is one thing that keeps third world countries with that undesirable label, it is having outdated, inefficient systems without accountability that promote injustice and corruption. There is a failure to properly scrutinise systems and make necessary adjustments to ensure that things function as they ought to. In this country, it is true in every sphere of national life including education, healthcare, BPL and the selection of jurors.
JB
Nassau
December 14, 2018
Comments
Sickened 5 years, 3 months ago
I agree! Our magistrates and judges need to direction as well. They are far too lenient (and I dare say 'Christian').
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID