The panel, which has reviewed a proposed overhaul of how trials are run, said the potential publicity surrounding the first trial, a lack of resources and a ‘shift in the balance of fairness’ towards the prosecution would make retrials difficult to carry out.
The review follows concerns raised in public hearings from senior court officials, including the Bailiff, Sir William Bailhache, and Commissioners Sir Michael Birt and Julian Clyde-Smith.
Home Affairs Minister Kristina Moore has put forward proposals to update the Criminal Procedures Law. These measures would, if approved, prevent rapists and child abusers from cross-examining their victims in court and would expand the pool of people who can be called to serve on juries.
However, the provision to allow the prosecution to call a retrial in the event that a jury cannot reach a majority verdict has proved the most controversial.
A recent Scrutiny sub-panel, which was chaired by Deputy Sam Mézec, said allowing retrials would shift the balance unfairly towards the prosecution and that they should not be able to call for a second trial if they were unable to convince a majority of ten jurors first time around.
Although the proposals have already been adopted in principle, the final approval of the law will not take place until later this month.
In an amendment to the proposals, the panel said: ‘On the balance of the evidence received on this particular matter, the sub-panel is of the opinion that the current system of acquittal in the absence of a majority guilty verdict is fair, and does provide opportunity for the prosecution to adequately prove its case.
‘As the draft law will seek to bring forward changes that require juries to attempt to reach unanimous decisions in the first instance, the sub-panel is minded to support the current system, whereby if a jury is unable to reach a majority guilty verdict then the defendant is acquitted.’
During his evidence to the panel Sir Michael said deciding whether to allow retrials would come down to ‘deciding whether the balance of fairness should be shifted towards the prosecution to allow them to have two bites at the cherry’.
The panel’s amendment added that the large media publicity around the first trial could prevent a defendant from receiving a fair trial and that a lack of available courtrooms to hold jury trials would stretch resources.
The proposals were adopted in principle by 34 votes to nil and are due to come back before the States on Tuesday 20 March.
