Search

The purpose of this study is to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the legislation governing social relations that develop in the process of compiling a jury when considering criminal cases with a jury trial. The relevance of the research topic is determined by the expansion of the jurors competence from June 1, 2018. Currently, one of the main reasons for revocation of court sentences passed with the participation of a jury is violations committed during formation of a jury. In this regard, the authors highlight the main procedural and organizational shortcomings of this process and make relevant suggestions: a) to improve the legislation governing the procedure for compiling a jury; b) to compile general and reserve lists based on information included in the Unified Federal Information Register; c) to perform video recording of the process [screen broadcasting] of a random selection of citizens from the general and reserve lists by a court staff member when compiling a preliminary list of jurors; d) to stipulate the right of citizens to defer the obligation to appear in court as a candidate for jurors to a later date; e) to apply new forms of sending invitations to appear in court to potential jurors.

The use of the Institute of jurors in Russia has been expanded since June 1, 2018. Today, courts with the participation of jurors consider criminal cases in regional courts and equivalent ones, as well as in district courts. At the same time, legislative innovations also affected the number of citizens who are members of the jury. These changes dictate the need for a scientific understanding of what happened, including the development of proposals aimed at optimizing the work of courts, representatives of the state prosecution and defense with a jury. In this regard, the purpose of the study is to improve the organization of criminal proceedings carried out by a court with the participation of jurors, taking into account the psychological characteristics of the judge, the public Prosecutor, the defense lawyer and the jury. In the course of the work, the author considers the results of psychological and legal research, which in one way or another affects the communicative features of participants in criminal proceedings. The paper makes the following main conclusions: a) to establish in the normative legal acts of the Judicial Department the main requirements for the list of property and technical means that provide comfortable conditions for jurors during the trial; b) to conduct systematic work with the staff of judges and employees of the court interacting with jurors in accordance with the recommendations given in the article; c) provide judges and employees of the court with methodological guidance concerning communication with a jury on work issues.