The Debate behind Jury Trials

Author: Ziyad Broker

Modern American legal dramas often showcase the importance of a jury — the representation of an everyday individual; normal citizens across many different demographics helping to run an exclusive branch of government. In doing so, they are often celebrated for helping bring about justice.

Yet, many countries including Pakistan have made jury trials rare — causing a lengthy and ongoing debate in the legal sphere.

On the one hand, jury trials allow for a slew of perspectives and opinions from a diverse set of people to be considered when making a legal decision. But, others argue that a judicial system reliant on jury trials is not only hard to manage logistically — but it can also lead to incorrect decisions based on hunches, biases, or a plain lack of legal understanding.

And this is the primary dilemma that every nation’s judiciary system faces: Should the opinion of the public be considered with a larger risk, or should the margin of error be reduced, and the general population ignored?

However, a component of Jury trials in developing countries still yet to be explored is the impact of corruption in both circumstances.

It is a common fact that, in the past, judges have indeed been bribed to make a certain decision. But, what is not as known, is the corruption that can occur with regards to juries — and in a multitude of ways. Aside from the traditional bribe, other methods juries have used to affect the outcome of a trial include breaking rules with regards to information available on the internet. This often goes unnoticed on the surface — but any influence from the media can skew somebody’s opinion of a case; thereby possessing the potential to affect the outcome of the trial.

It is mainly for this reason, that in developing countries, juries aren’t common, and will continue not to be. Coupled with low education rates, which is another factor that could affect the outcome of trials — it seems logical that only countries with a specified literacy rate should be allowed to have jury trials — for the sake of justice.