Charles, a resident of Namur was almost sworn in an assize trial. He is surprised that the accused has access to the complete identity of the citizens called upon to judge his actions. He wonders if these legal proceedings are still necessary. Assize juries are, however, a form of citizen participation in justice and a civic duty.
Taking part in an assize jury is a unique experience… which Charles is nevertheless happy to have been able to avoid so far. Via the orange Alert us button, he reports having been invited to participate in a popular jury but not having been selected. The Namurois reveals to have had some fears, which he details: “The condemned man was present and attended the whole debate. He heard the names and first names of the jurors who will give their opinions on the sentence he will receive”. “Aren’t the jurors afraid of pressure or possible reprisals?”asks Charles.
It all started with a letter delivered by a bailiff by hand. “It was my partner who opened the door. She was shocked, she wondered what I had done and what we were going to have to pay…”, he recalls. He adds that a policeman then went to his home to investigate and then that he received a summons to take part in a trial last June in Namur.
If you type my first and last name on the internet, you know where I live
140 people are then summoned to the jury constitution hearing in the trial of a man accused of having killed his brother. There is a draw. 12 jurors and three alternates are finally selected. Charles is not one of them and this is good news for the father of two children, who also confides having drunk a pint or two “of relief” following the hearing, with one of the other jurors not chosen. “What bothers me a little? If you type my first and last name on the internet, you know where I live… If I had been selected, I would have done it because it is a civic duty, but it might have scare me, precisely because of my two daughters”.
In life, the 50-year-old is a computer trainer, so he is particularly aware of the potential risks associated with digital identity. Which makes him wonder “if justice is well adapted to new information technologies?” Because these procedures, he adds, date from a time when there was no internet.
What is the point of stating the precise identity of the jurors in the presence of the accused?
First observations: we are in a human justice, we therefore know the face and the identity of the person who judges. And the particularity of the assize court is precisely that the judges are citizens who are drawn by lot. It is a form of citizen participation in justice.
There is often a debate between maintaining and abolishing the assize court, since in all other cases they are professional judges, recalls Damien Vandermeersch, professor of criminal law at UCLouvain and member of the former commission reform of the assize court.
For the teacher, this is a very delicate question because “justice must be rendered in a public way, so that means that the public has access to the courtroom and that also means that the judge is not anonymous”. He specifies : “we cannot conceive, currently in any case, that people are judged by others, jurors or professional judges, who would act under cover of anonymity. Justice must be a little transparent”.
And this obligation is provided for by law, abounds judge Marie Messiaen, the spokesperson for the Association Syndicale de la Magistrature. “It is an essential condition to know who is judging, who makes the decision to deprive someone of their liberty or not”. It also specifies that: “The impartiality and objectivity of the people who make up a jury are elementary and fundamental conditions. The procedure provides, for a popular jury, the possibility for the parties to challenge, to dismiss, not to select a juror even before the trial, without necessarily having to justify it, so it is essential to know who we are dealing with”.
What regarding possible fears of reprisals?
For the two lawyers, the risks of reprisals are really minimal. The spokeswoman for the Association Syndicale de la Magistrature points out that the juror is not alone: “He only intervenes in a mode of collective decision. And within this jury, the jurors are not the most exposed. Unless they stand out, because he would show signs of disapproval and there he especially risks to be dismissed”.
It’s a minimal risk to live with
“We can understand the fears of citizens”considers Damien Vandermeersch even if he judges, like Marie Messiaen that “professional actors are more exposed”. The magistrate also recalls in this regard that a justice of the peace and a clerk were shot dead in the middle of a hearing in 2010 in Brussels. “Zero risk does not exist. If we accept the idea of a popular jury, it is a minimal risk with which we must live”she argues.
Can a juror be challenged for fear of reprisal?
According to the professor of criminal law, it is likely “that a juror who would say that he feels unable to judge, because he harbors fears and that he risks being influenced by these fears, be challenged by the prosecutor, or excused insofar as he is honest in his approach.
Should justice adapt these procedures to the reality of information technologies?
“If you fear being identified, today you don’t even need people’s names, there are facial recognition systems”objected the magistrate.
For Damien Vandermeersch, the question of adaptation, “it’s not a question of information technology, but rather of anonymity or not”. Even if it means going all the way… “Can you imagine? We’re not going to put hooded judges or jurors in court… I don’t see a system of justice rendered by anonymous judges, because even for democratic control, you still have to know who rendered the decision, otherwise we can hide behind anonymity and hide things, it creates suspicion”argues the professor.
The French example
Damien Vandermeersch raises the French example. In terms of terrorism, France has switched to another system of assize courts, but with a jury made up of professional magistrates. “For me, it’s no longer an assize court, it’s a court of professionals”. The decision was made because at some point they mightn’t find any more jurors, precisely because they harbored too great fears in this type of case.
And in Belgium?
The trial of the attacks of March 22, 2016 in Brussels is due to begin next October before the Brussels Assize Court. “We have already had quite a few terrorism cases tried in corrections and it happened in a way, it seems to me, quite calm, without there being a climate of threats or particular concerns. “enlightens Damien Vandermeersch for whom “we managed to keep a good balance between security and protection on the one hand and a public and democratic process on the other”.
Does the assize court, as it exists today, still have an interest?
The main interest, for Damien Vandermeersch, is citizen participation “with somewhere this freshness of spirit of the citizen”. The reform commission of the assize court, of which he was a member, proposed at the time, a mixed system, that is to say a court composed of both professional judges and voluntary citizens. These would be people who would enter into a justice process and who would exercise their functions for a few years. “It would be interesting because we would have citizens who we might train in terms of understanding more complex issues but who would also have this slightly more external, slightly newer look”, comments the professor. But the political choice is for the moment to maintain the Assize Court.
This time, Charles did not have the heavy task of participating in the judgment of the actions of another individual but he knows that it might still happen to him. “It was the first time I was called up, but I am on the list for a period of five years”specifies the Namurois.
