The jury system in Russia was first implemented in 1864 and abolished by the Bolshevik government in 1922. The new Code on Criminal Procedures of the Russian Federation reintroduced jury trials in sixty-nine of eighty-nine regions in Russia. Jury trials faced much opposition when first being reinstated.
At the time of reinstatement, many lawyers believed that jury trials did an excellent job of defending innocent people but failed to punish criminals. Russia was attempting to put in place a jury system similar to that of the United States, however this was met with much opposition. Attorney Aleksandr Griboedov stated that jurors are often “unemployed, retired, citizens that fail to disclose their criminal past, and persons prone to alcoholic …show more content…
The limited presentation and study of evidence in court was provided as a solution to the issue of state secrets being kept however, no action has been taken to ensure this is the case.
Furthermore, juries have no jurisdiction over civil cases. Juries are able to consider criminal cases specifically, especially when a person is facing the death penalty. In Russia, any person who was accused of committing a serious crimes, especially when accused by the death penalty, has the right to have their case considered by a jury who will report their verdict to the presiding judge. Juries face aggravated murder, racketeering, aggravated bribery, and crimes against justice.
When the jury trials were first reinstated, the majority of the cases heard by juries were of murder with aggravating circumstances and rapes. Only 20% of the cases considered by jury trials were for civil crimes. When deliberating, jurors fill out a questionnaire with questions along the lines of; had sufficient evidence been provided to suggest a crime was committed, are they guilty or innocent, and should the defendant receive a harsh or less harsh punishment? The sentence delivered by the judge is based on the jurors’ verdict once they have been approved for complying with the law and being
At the time of reinstatement, many lawyers believed that jury trials did an excellent job of defending innocent people but failed to punish criminals. Russia was attempting to put in place a jury system similar to that of the United States, however this was met with much opposition. Attorney Aleksandr Griboedov stated that jurors are often “unemployed, retired, citizens that fail to disclose their criminal past, and persons prone to alcoholic …show more content…
The limited presentation and study of evidence in court was provided as a solution to the issue of state secrets being kept however, no action has been taken to ensure this is the case.
Furthermore, juries have no jurisdiction over civil cases. Juries are able to consider criminal cases specifically, especially when a person is facing the death penalty. In Russia, any person who was accused of committing a serious crimes, especially when accused by the death penalty, has the right to have their case considered by a jury who will report their verdict to the presiding judge. Juries face aggravated murder, racketeering, aggravated bribery, and crimes against justice.
When the jury trials were first reinstated, the majority of the cases heard by juries were of murder with aggravating circumstances and rapes. Only 20% of the cases considered by jury trials were for civil crimes. When deliberating, jurors fill out a questionnaire with questions along the lines of; had sufficient evidence been provided to suggest a crime was committed, are they guilty or innocent, and should the defendant receive a harsh or less harsh punishment? The sentence delivered by the judge is based on the jurors’ verdict once they have been approved for complying with the law and being