Prosecutors plan to apply this week to hold a major criminal trial without a jury for the first time. The step is being taken because of concerns that jurors assigned to the case – which involves members of an organised criminal network – would be vulnerable to intimidation or bribery.
The Times understands that the request for a no-jury trial is being made after close consultation with the Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Ken Macdonald, QC.
Provision for dispensing with a jury is contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 but this is the first time that prosecutors have sought to use it.
The move will revive concern over the future of jury trials in Britain. The Government has previously tried to abolish jury trial for complex fraud cases and there has been debate about the future use of juries in some child abuse and terrorism cases.
The Home Office is already facing criticism over powers in the new Counter-terrorism Bill that would allow the Government to prevent a jury hearing some inquests on the ground of national security.
Advertisement
Details of the current case cannot be disclosed because of the danger of prejudicing the trial if the Crown’s application is rejected and a jury is sworn in.
It can be reported, however, that it follows a lengthy police investigation into a large drug-trafficking ring.
The prosecution told the trial judge on Friday that it wanted him to preside over the trial alone, then return a verdict. Lawyers indicated to the judge that they would make a formal application to him tomorrow.
They will rely on Section 44 of the 2003 Act which says that a trial without a jury can be sought if there is “evidence of a real and present danger that jury tampering would take place”.
The Crown will also have to prove that the threat to the integrity of the jury would persist even if police protection or other security measures were put in place.
Advertisement
The application comes six months after the courts system in Northern Ireland was reformed to reintroduce jury trial. Judge-only trials were established in the Province in 1973 to combat widespread intimidation of jurors by paramilitary groups.
Lawyers said last night that although problems of jury tampering existed, the situation in England and Wales was not comparable with the violence and intimidation in Ulster during the worst days of the Troubles.
Rock Tansey, QC, founder of the European Criminal Bar Association, said: “This is very much the thin end of the wedge and follows other suggestions from Government, such as conducting certain fraud trials without juries. It amounts to another attempt to undermine trial by jury. There are serious circumstances where jury intimidation can happen but it is not beyond the wit of Man to put measures in place to protect juries.
“I think the preservation of jury trial is fundamental to our system of justice. It is a mark of a civilised society and it is imperative that it is retained.
“Once you have crossed the line and had one no-jury trial then there will be huge problems. There are many cases where problems arise with juries but the answer is not to abolish jury trial.”
Advertisement
The Government’s attempt to remove juries from complicated fraud trials met with stiff legal and political opposition. After the collapse of the £60 million Jubilee Line fraud trial and difficulties with a number of other complex cases, ministers introduced the Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill in 2006.
They argued that justice was not being served because some suspects were not brought to trial because of the danger of making trials too complicated and that the duration of cases placed an intolerable strain on juries.
The measure was passed by MPs but was blocked in the House of Lords last March. Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers led the opposition to the measure and were joined by a number of prominent Labour rebels, including Baroness Mallalieu, QC, who said that the Bill would “stick a knife into the main artery of our criminal justice system”.