Legal status of the jury institute in criminal judicial procedure

The article analyzes the legal status of the jury in the criminal proceedings of Ukraine. It is noted that after gaining independence, the justice system of Ukraine is in fact in a state of constant reform. As a result of the 2016 reform, amendments were made to the Constitution of Ukraine on justice, and a new version of the Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” was adopted.

An important element of the justice system is the institution of juries, which was enshrined in the 1996 Constitution. People's assessors took part in the process of judicial knowledge. With the adoption of the new Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine in 2012, the institute of lay judges was abolished, and the mechanism of collegial review of criminal cases was introduced - the institute of jury trial, ie the continental system where jurors make decisions together with professional judges. Experts are inclined to believe that only the courts of the Anglo-American system can be considered in fact a jury trial in the classical sense, where the jury (jury) is independent in its decision from professional judges.The new code established a range of crimes that can be decided by a jury. These include those for which the maximum penalty is life imprisonment.

It was found that the introduction of the jury in Ukraine is generally in line with world practice. The Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine establishes the procedure for selecting jurors, their composition, procedural rights and responsibilities, the reasons for exclusion from participation in the trial of criminal proceedings, etc. At the same time, the effectiveness of the jury is still a little-known and controversial issue, as the lack of tradition minimizes the number of jury trials and requires an additional awareness campaign on its specifics and possibilities of application.

It is noted that in the framework of judicial reform the jury also needs to reform the legal framework to better foreign experience, clearer delineation of powers of judges and jurors, expanding the list of cases heard by juries, preventing the influence of professional judges to increase the number of jurors. jurors in court.