Judges as Tribunals of Fact Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Judges as Tribunals of Fact - Essay Example Criminal Justice Act of 2003 sought to remove the right to trial by jury for cases involving jury tampering or complex fraud. The provision for trial without jury is to circumvent jury tampering and came into force in 2007. However, some people have argued that this is in contravention of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a provision of the European Convention which protects the right to a fair trial. It is argued that trial by the jury protects public interest immunity hence it is in conformity with Article 6. Jury tampering is the crime of attempting to influence the composition decisions of a jury during the course of a trial. This crime can be committed by attempting to discredit potential jurors to ensure they will not be selected for duty. Once selected, jurors could be bribed or intimidated to act in a certain manner on duty. It could also involve meeting them against the law for the purpose of introducing prohibited outside information and then arguing for a mistrial. There had been several reported jury tampering cases in the past which necessitated this change in trend. The jury plays the role of fact finding and leaves the interpretation of the law to the judge and instructing the jury accordingly. The jury will render a verdict on the defendants guilt, or civil liability. Work of the juries is often justified as they are considered to leavening the law with community norms. Usually if the jurors find the law to be invalid or unfair, they may acquit the defendant, regardless of the evidence that the defendant violated the law.