Trial by Jury: Free Choice of the Accused

The paper explores the problem of out-of-procedure influence on the accused when he is making a decision if it is necessary to consider his case in court with the participation of jurors. The author considers various points of view of practicing lawyers, the results of judicial statistical data and makes the following conclusions. Since the procedure for considering a criminal case with the participation of jurors in terms of complexity, costs of both organizational and material nature far exceeds the ordinary procedure of legal proceedings, there has formed a vicious practice of illegal restriction of the freedom of choice of the accused. Thus, the accused is warned that in case of choosing a trial with the participation of jurors he will get the maximum possible punishment if they render a guilty verdict. As a result, the accused either does not file a petition for consideration of his case with the participation of jurors at all, or refuses an already filed petition. Thus, it is necessary to consolidate the guarantees of the accused’s free choice of this form of legal proceedings at the regulatory level. It is necessary to develop a mechanism that excludes the possibility of out-of-procedure influence if the accused wishes to involve representatives of the citizens in the consideration of his case. To solve this problem, the author proposes the following model. At the request of the defendant, representatives of the citizens should be involved in resolving the issue of sentencing him. In the event of a guilty verdict, two randomly selected jurors, together with the presiding judge, decide all the issues necessary for sentencing. The proves that with this approach, illegal influence on the accused loses all meaning, since all participants in the process will be aware of his right to involve his fellow citizens in the sentencing procedure, his individualization.

1. Vereshchagin AN. O razvitii suda prisyazhnykh v Rossii [On the development of the jury trial in Russia]. Zakon [Law]. 2017;2:101-113. (In Russ.).

2. Golovko LV. Teoreticheskie i sravnitelno-pravovye podkhody k opredeleniyu modeli uchastiya grazhdan v otpravlenii pravosudiya po ugolovnym delam [Theoretical and comparative legal approaches to determining the model of citizens’ participation in the administration of justice in criminal cases]. Rossiyskoe pravosudie [Russian justice]. 2015;8:40-49. (In Russ.).

3. Kony AF. Nravstvennye nachala v ugolovnom protsesse. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Moral principles in the criminal process. Selected works]. Moscow: Gosyurizdat; 1956. (In Russ.).

4. Golovko LV, ed. Kurs ugolovnogo protsessa [The course of criminal procedure]. Moscow: Statut; 2016. (In Russ.).

5. Foynitskiy IYa. Kurs ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva: T.1 [The course of the criminal procedure. Vol. 1]. St. Petersburg: Alfa; 1996. (In Russ.).

6. Lyakhov YuA, Malina MA. Sushchnost konstitutsionnogo prava grazhdanina na uchastie v otpravlenii pravosudiya [The essence of the constitutional right of a citizen to participate in the administration of justice]. Severo-Kavkazskiy yuridicheskiy vestnik [North Caucausus Legal Vestnik]. 2019;1:130-138. (In Russ.).

7. Nasonov SA. Norvezhskaya model proizvodstva v sude prisyazhnykh [Norwegian model of jury trial]. Voprosy sovremennoy yurisprudentsii. 2015;45-46:56-61. (In Russ.).

8. Golovko LV, Mathie B, eds. Sud i gosudarstvo [The court and the State]. Moscow: Statut; 2018. (In Russ.).

9. Golovko LV. Sudoustroystvo i pravookhranitelnye organy: uchebnik [Judicial system and law enforcement agencies. A textbook]. Moscow: Gorodets; 2020. (In Russ.).

10. Vasiliev A, Baranovskiy A. Sud prisyazhnykh: posledniy shans Femidy. Advokat v protsesse s prisyazhnymi: strategiya i taktika zashchity [Jury trial: Themis’ last chance. A lawyer in the process with the jury: Strategy and tactics of defense]. Ekaterinburg: Izdatelskie resheniya; 2017. (In Russ.).

11. Foynitskiy IYA. Uchenie o nakazanii v svyazi s tyurmovedeniem [The doctrine of punishment in connection with prison studies]. St. Petersburg: Printing house of the Ministry of Railways; 1889. (In Russ.).

12. Khodzhaeva EA. Sudy prisyazhnykh v ofitsialnoy statistike: analiticheskiy obzor [Jury Trials in official statistics. An analytical review]. St. Petersburg: Institute of Law Enforcement Problems at the European University in St. Petersburg. (In Russ.).