The British legal system has long experience of no-jury trials, but only in outposts.
Courts where judges sit alone – presiding over the trial, hearing the evidence and then reaching a verdict – were introduced in Northern Ireland in 1973. They were a response to a series of “perverse acquittals” in terrorist trials, which were the result of either partisan jurors or jury intimidation.
Edward Heath’s Government, fearful that the justice system was in danger of breaking down, set up a commission chaired by Lord Diplock, a senior judge, to investigate the problem. It proposed the idea of judges conducting trials alone. The hearings became known as Diplock courts.
They dealt with “scheduled offences”, usually related to terrorism. In recent years, after the paramilitary ceasefires, the number of cases before the Diplock courts has declined. In 2006 there were about 60 no-jury cases in Northern Ireland, compared with more than 300 two decades ago.
Lord Carlile of Berriew, QC, the reviewer of terrorism legislation, reported that “the quality of judgment in the Diplock courts is very high” and said that statistics showed “at least as high an acquittal rate in the single-judge courts as in jury trial”.
Advertisement
One recent acquittal was the not-guilty verdict returned by Mr Justice Weir in the Omagh bombing trial in December. The judge acquitted Sean Hoey of 29 murder charges and was critical of the police investigation and the quality of DNA evidence.
New legislation was passed last year to reform the courts system in the Province and establish a presumption of jury trial once more. However, the Diplock courts will remain to hear a small number of cases. The trial of a man charged in connection with the £26 million Northern Bank robbery in Belfast in 2004 is due to take place before a no-jury court this year.