Do American juries need to learn some legal knowledge during the trial?

Jury system is a judicial system originated from western countries. Common law countries, such as Britain and the United States, practice jury system, while civil law countries, such as Germany and France, practice jury system or mixed collegiate bench system.

One of the main purposes of the jury system is to embody judicial democracy. Engels pointed out in the article "Closure of Criminal Law Newspaper": "Judicial power is the direct property of citizens, and citizens realize this power through their own jurors, which has been proved not only in the principle itself, but also in history." Judicial power is an important part of state power. Judicial power, like other state powers, should also be enjoyed by citizens. The implementation of jury system provides the most direct and important way for citizens to participate in judicial activities, which undoubtedly directly embodies the principle of judicial democracy.

The jury system in the west directly originated from the judicial idea of similar trials in ancient times. According to the concept of similar trial, people have the right to choose their own kind of people as judges when they are tried, because only similar people can truly understand the feelings of the tried and consider the rights and interests of the tried. The participation of similar people in the trial is the basis of the reliability and authority of the trial itself. Due to the differences in historical traditions and social culture between the common law system and the civil law system, the jury system has gradually evolved into the jury system of the common law system and the jury system of the civil law system or the mixed court system. Although these two jury systems are different, their original intention is to promote judicial justice by ordinary people participating in court trials on behalf of social conscience.

The jury system in Anglo-American legal system is composed of ordinary citizens without legal background. It is the duty of the judge to judge the facts of the case and apply the law. Critics believe that on the one hand, the jury system leads to protracted litigation, which is contrary to the pursuit of litigation efficiency in modern society; On the other hand, the jury's determination and judgment of the case is not based on strict logical reasoning, but on the so-called "sense of social justice" and the subjective judgment of people who have no legal knowledge at all. This layman's ruling is irrational. Some people even think this system is ridiculous. It puts people's wealth, dignity and even life under the will of 12 people with no legal knowledge and experience, different motives and backgrounds, and they make decisions to kill and detain for no reason. Supporters believe that the implementation of the jury system actually divides the power of judges and effectively prevents judges from abusing judicial power; The jury is ad hoc and its members are randomly selected. After participating in trial activities, being isolated from the outside world can effectively prevent judicial corruption; Although jury members have no legal background, they have ordinary people's social life experience and moral conscience, which can make up for the lack of professional judges' life experience and ensure the fairness of the trial.

As one of the judicial democratic systems, the people's jury system in China once became a basic judicial principle stipulated by the Constitution and laws. However, the importance of the people's jury system tends to weaken, even to the point where it is ignored and exists in name only. The legislative, judicial and academic circles have been paying attention to this system, and the debate around this system has never stopped. Especially in the background of judicial reform, the function of jury system, the way out of reform and its possible positive significance to judicial justice have aroused people's further thinking.

The emergence of jury is the antonym of judicial arbitrariness. Although it has played an irreplaceable role in China's judicial democracy, with the development of society, the existing people's jury system has lagged behind the requirements of judicial practice, and we have to admit that the importance of the people's jury system is gradually weakening.

(1) In legislation, China's people's jury system has been implemented for decades, but there is still no complete people's jury law. This makes the appearance of people's jurors, and the duties, rights and obligations of people's jurors and their supervision and restriction lack reliable legal basis.

1, the production of people's jurors. At present, some courts are mainly recruiting for the society. The conditions are: graduation from high school or above, good political quality, love of trial work, strong sense of responsibility, and physical fitness suitable for trial needs. According to such conditions, it is recommended by all walks of life, and then the court summarizes it and reports it to the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) for decision. Due to the imperfection of legislation, the production and management of people's jurors are arbitrary. Some jurors are elected, and some are hired by the court. They lack strict and unified production procedures and standardized management, which affects the image of the court's serious law enforcement.

2. Duties, rights and obligations of people's jurors. Because the duties, rights and obligations are not clearly defined in the legislation, people's jurors cannot perform their duties correctly and enjoy their due rights. Therefore, in judicial practice, people's jurors "accompany without trial" and even refuse to participate.

3. Supervision and management of people's jurors. Judges and people's jurors are symbols of justice and fairness. While strengthening the supervision and management of judges, we must attach importance to the supervision and management of people's jurors. However, the perfect supervision and management mechanism of people's jurors has not yet been formed in judicial practice, which will affect judicial justice more or less.

In addition, the funds of people's jurors and a series of procedural issues involved in inviting people's jurors have not yet formed a relatively stable system, which has brought many difficulties to the development of people's jury system.

(2) In practice, the people's jury system also has many unsatisfactory places.

1, people's jurors "accompany without trial". People's jurors who are unfamiliar with the law and lack practical judicial experience have to accept the guidance of professional judges and rely on the judges' interpretation of legal provisions and judicial interpretations and the analysis of the legal significance of case facts when working with professional judges. In addition, as an ordinary person, having a respect or even awe for the professional knowledge of professional judges will naturally produce an authoritative mentality. Therefore, when discussing and making a judgment, they can only let the judge decide, which often makes the jurors fully agree with the opinions of professional judges, and the jurors' views on the case become copies of the judges' opinions. At this time, the jury just became a foil.

2. People's jurors have a weak sense of participation. Because there is no uniform selection standard, the quality of people's jurors is uneven. Some people's jurors don't have a strong sense of participation, don't know that they shoulder the people's wishes and bear the responsibilities paid by society, are indifferent to jury work, or are afraid of trouble and offending people, and don't really regard jury work as a legal right and obligation.

3. People's courts have not paid enough attention to this. Based on the consideration of funds, simplicity and convenience, the court paid insufficient attention to the people's jury system.

All these factors make the people's jury system just a banner of people's justice, which is only symbolic.

The future reform direction of China's jury system should first confirm the people's jury system in legislation and determine the ways, channels, rights and obligations of people's jurors in legal form.

1, on the selection of people's jurors. Implementing the system of one thing and one discussion is a key step in the reform of the people's jury system. The Standing Committee of the Basic People's Congress may, during each term of office, draw up a list of people who meet the qualifications of people's jurors according to the conditions preset by law, and the court shall select jurors by drawing lots by difference or equal amount. By exercising the right to apply for withdrawal, both the prosecution and the defense can ensure that the non-professional judge can gain the trust of both the prosecution and the defense. The conditions for the selection of jurors should be conducive to the broad participation of the people and should not be too strict.

2. Give people's jurors job immunity. For non-professional judges, we should give them corresponding professional security like professional judges, so that they can make independent judgments on the right and wrong of cases according to the principles of conscience and social justice when performing their duties, and prevent them from being improperly influenced by people including professional judges. Therefore, some immunities equivalent to the duties of people's jurors should be formulated in legislation.

3. There should be hard and fast rules on people's participation in justice. People's participation in the judiciary, if dispensable, may be ineffective because the court is unwilling to implement this system. Therefore, the law should make rigid provisions on people's participation in justice (in some cases, the "statutory jury system" of juries must be applied) and flexible provisions (in some cases, the "request jury system" of juries should be applied at the request of defendants), so that the people's jury system can be implemented.

4. Supervision and management of people's jurors. As a non-fixed trial team outside the court, the supervision and management of people's jurors should be linked with the management of professional judges. First of all, it should be included in the regular supervision and inspection scope of NPC; Secondly, clarify the management authority of the people's court to the people's jurors; Third, the court organizes people's jurors to conduct professional training and conduct professional assessments on a regular basis.

In addition, because most people's jurors have their own jobs, people's jurors' participation in the jury will inevitably affect their own work, so legislation should also clearly stipulate the financial subsidy standards for people's jurors and a series of procedural issues involved in inviting people's jurors.

(2) In practice, the western jury system can also be selectively introduced in conditional areas. For example, jurors no longer jury cases as individuals, and their jury activities should be concrete actions of the jury; The role of jurors should focus on the facts of the case, that is, whether the facts of the case exist, while judges mainly solve the problem of law application, that is, which legal provisions should be applied to the facts of the case. This division of labor not only clarifies the rights and obligations of people's jurors and judges in the trial, but also breaks the chaotic situation in which people's jurors and judges tried cases together in the past, effectively avoiding the embarrassing state of people's jurors "accompanying but not trying" in the trial. Of course, while introducing advanced western systems, we should pay close attention to China's national conditions and avoid the total westernization of the people's jury system reform.