Recently, The BVI Beacon carried a special report about the jury system and an editorial calling for the amendment of certain aspects of the Jury Act 1914. Meanwhile, several prominent legal luminaries in the region have been calling for the complete abolishment of jury trials.
In the time of Edward III in the 11th Century, the jury system had been substituted by due process of law, which in those times was a trial by 12 peers. The Magna Carta of 1215 further secured trial by jury, and this was handed down and practised in the Virgin Islands and all Commonwealth countries and territories.
However, a few countries abolished the jury system, including South Africa in 1969 — a fact that was not known by many persons outside that country until the trial of the well known Olympic medallist, Oscar Pistorius, who is charged with the murder of his girlfriend.
In the Caribbean
Closer to home, Belize abolished trial by jury in murder cases and attempted murder cases four years ago, and a year ago Guyanese-born Chief Justice Kenneth Benjamin, who presided and decided the first criminal case, found a young man guilty of shooting and attempting to kill a senior counsel, Rodney Williams, who is the law partner of the country’s prime minister, Dean Barrow. Justice Benjamin found the accused guilty and sentenced him to 15 years imprisonment.
And a few months ago, Trinidad and Tobago Chief Justice Ivor Archie called for the jury system to be reviewed with an eye to introducing trial by judge. His comment was supported by two retired chief justices, one of whom also served as the president of the Caribbean Court of Justice, the highest court of the land.
In Guyana, one of the country’s leading senior counsel, Ralph Ramkarran, who served as speaker of Parliament, is pushing for the jury system to be abolished.
In the VI
Here in the VI, a few senior lawyers also see the need for single judges to determine criminal cases, but since the VI is an overseas territory of the United Kingdom, this would not be possible without the approval of the British Parliament.
The advocates for the abolishment of the jury system are contending that there is no magic in the principle of trial by peers — even though it is an ancient system that has worked in many societies, particularly those that have inherited the common law tradition. It is further argued that jury trial by peers is neither a constitutional nor a human right.
In the VI, where the population is extremely small, jurors seem to know about the cases long before the trial, and it is contended that some of them arrive at their decisions not from the evidence led in court, but from newspapers or online reports.
On the other hand, magistrates determine more than 90 percent of the criminal cases without a jury, although those cases are not as serious as those decided by juries.
It seems to me, therefore, that jury trial will continue in the VI for a very long time, but there is need to amend the Jury Act to prevent disparity in the selection of juries as regards objections between the prosecution and the defence.
{fcomment}