The revelation that low juror turnout is affecting trials slated for the Home Circuit Court in Kingston will, we expect, reignite the long-running debate about bench vs jury trials.

Yesterday’s Sunday Observer lead story told us that of the 1,500 Jamaicans summoned for duty during the current sitting of the court, only 33 have showed. Additionally, the Court Administration Division reported that between October 14 and November 4 there were 35 requests by individuals who wished to be excused from jury duty, and of that number, 29 requests were granted and six refused.

The issue, our report said, came to the fore during a case management hearing for three accused individuals last Monday in the Supreme Court, which was being presided over by Justice Leighton Pusey.

Attorney Ms Diane Jobson, who represents one of the three defendants, was not pleased — and rightly so — at the length of time it was taking for a trial date to be set for the matter which had been before the court several times since the term began. However, Justice Pusey explained that the further delay was due to several reasons, including the novel coronavirus pandemic, the ongoing Klansman gang trial — which has engaged two main courtrooms for the better part of two years — and insufficient jurors.

The pandemic has, no doubt, had a crippling effect on the court system. As our report reminded readers, Chief Justice Bryan Sykes has, on several occasions since 2020, urged individuals to opt for judge-alone trials.

According to Mr Sykes, with trials being “pushed further and further back” due to the suspension of jury trials, because of the vagaries of the pandemic, “it is just a matter of time before someone is going to make the case that their constitutional rights to a fair trial within a reasonable time are being violated”.

We recall that in September 2020, at the start of the Michaelmas term of the St James Circuit Court, Justice Sykes had noted that an entire term had passed without jury trials because of the pandemic.

To bolster his argument the chief justice pointed out that, under the law, the right that is guaranteed is to a fair trial before a properly constituted and impartial court.

He also put forward that, in the event of an adverse verdict, “the system provides the mechanism by which any injustice can be addressed”.

Justice Sykes’s arguments are valid. However, we part company with him on one point, that being his advocacy for doing away with jury trials, even as we acknowledge that in a number of instances jurors tend to be driven by emotion, rather than the law, in arriving at verdicts.

We believe that there are some matters that are extremely technical and ought not to be subjected to raw emotion. In those instances, bench trials should be the preferred option, although there could be a compromise, as in matters of cybercrime that would require jurors with knowledge or expertise in that sector.

However, the problem the country is facing, as reported yesterday, is actually getting people to serve as jurors. The reasons for this level of apathy vary. Some people fear that adjudicating criminal matters can place their lives at risk, others regard serving as a waste of time as there is no great financial benefit.

However, more Jamaicans need to accept that serving as jurors is a civic duty designed to hold the State to the principles of the constitution.