16. Costs and benefits
Updates and background for this project (Digest)
16.1 In this chapter, we summarise the costs and benefits which we expect to follow from our recommendations. In doing so, we have not attempted to put any exact figures on the likely savings or additional costs because we do not have the necessary data.
CHANGES TO ENROLMENT AND SUMMONING
16.2 Costs savings to the procedure for enrolment and summoning will be achieved by:
- jurors being summoned directly from the relevant electoral rolls;1
- the use of ‘smart’ electoral rolls and cross-checking of data with other ‘trusted agencies’2 . This will reduce the number of summonses posted to incorrect addresses. The ability to cross-check with databases that record criminal history3 will reduce the number of summonses that are sent out to people who are disqualified by reason of criminal history.
16.3 These changes, together with the elimination of many of the current grounds of ineligibility and of exemption as of right, will ultimately reduce the number of summonses that need to be sent out to obtain an adequate panel of potential jurors for any particular trial.
16.4 The cost involved in processing applications to be excused after summons may initially increase, if our recommendations result in an increased number of applications to be excused or to defer jury service at that stage. However, there are not likely to be more applications to be excused than are currently received at both the notice of inclusion and summons stages. This is because people will no longer need to apply to be excused at the summons stage, having previously been unsuccessful at the notice of inclusion stage.
16.5 In the longer term, the Commission believes the development of more comprehensive and appropriate guidelines, along with the creation of greater clarification concerning those who fall within the various categories of exclusions, will introduce greater certainty to the system, and ultimately reduce the number of applications to be excluded or otherwise excused for cause.
CHANGES TO EMPANELMENT PROCEDURES
16.6 The costs involved in delaying trials and summoning further jurors where a panel has an inadequate number of potential jurors will be reduced by courts being permitted to empanel jurors who have been summoned to other courts in the same area.4
16.7 The costs involved in aborting trials and conducting retrials will be reduced by our recommendations that seek to:
- reduce the number of people who are ineligible for jury service;5
- save juries where there has been an irregularity in empanelment;6
- allow for the empanelment of additional jurors;7 and
- allow the Sheriff to cross-check with criminal record databases.8
CHANGES TO REMUNERATION OF JURORS
16.8 The costs involved in paying jurors will be increased by our recommendation that a part allowance should be made available for those who attend for less than four hours9 and by any increases in the attendance allowance and travel allowance that result from our recommendations, as well as by the proposed capped compensation for additional financial losses and for additional out-of-pocket expenses.10 However, some reduction in costs may be possible as a result of our recommendation to require a certificate of loss of earnings or income11 that may prevent double dipping and will also ensure that only those who have actually suffered a loss of income as a result of jury service are adequately compensated. We recognise that any enhancement of the allowance payable to jurors will require the provision of additional resources. However, in the Commission’s view, public confidence in the jury system will be enhanced because jurors will have increased satisfaction and juries will be more representative. Increasing the remuneration of jurors should also lead to a reduction in the number of people seeking to be excused, and consequently in the number of summonses that will need to be issued and served.
CHANGES TO INFORMATION DELIVERY AND TECHNOLOGY
16.9 The costs involved in communicating with jurors and potential jurors may increase initially as new methods of communication are developed and old methods of communication are revised.12 However, recurring costs may decrease as less costly and more efficient methods of communication are adopted.
16.10 There will be a substantial one-off cost in developing an appropriate computer system that can aid the management of jury service, and in reviewing and updating the orientation video and other information provided to jurors. In the longer term, however, improved management of the jury system through upgraded information technology systems, and encouraging service through community education13 will result in jurors being better prepared for service which should lead to a reduction in the number of jurors seeking to be excused.
THE COMMISSION’S CONCLUSION
16.11 We consider that the improvements outlined above will enhance the efficiency of the jury system. The resulting savings, particularly those related to the drawing of jurors directly from the electoral rolls, as well as those related to the improved empanelment procedures, will help to limit the extent of any overall increase in the costs of the system attributable to other recommendations.
16.12 The critical fact remains that juror satisfaction with the conditions of service is of paramount importance for the goals of securing representative juries, and of maintaining confidence in the system of trial by jury. While budgetary constraints must be respected, juries play an integral role in the justice system and must be appropriately funded.
FOOTNOTES
1. See para 8.39-8.50.
2. See para 8.26-8.38.
3. See para 8.34.
4. See para 10.62-10.64.
5. See chapters 4 and 5.
6. See para 11.25-11.46.
7. See para 10.43.-10.61.
8. See para 8.34.
9. See para 12.32.
10. See para 12.22-12.31.
11. See para 12.30.
12. See para 13.30.
13. See para 13.13-13.16.
