The chairman of the Moscow Helsinki Group, Lyudmila Alekseyeva, said jurors had been summoned to the prosecutor's office and required to reveal which verdict they had reached. She added that jurors had also been tailed and instances of eavesdropping had occurred. Therefore, the human rights activists asked the president to take trial by jury under his personal control.
Human rights advocates believe that since trial by jury began on January 1, 2003, jurors have been able to frustrate several high-profile espionage cases, thereby causing trouble for public prosecutors. One example was acquittal of physicist Valentin Danilov, though the prosecutor's office later appealed the jurors' decision in the Supreme Court, and the scientist was convicted.
"Law enforcers are trying to infect jurors with the illnesses of the Russian justice system, corruption, disdain for law and a desire to score points with the executive authorities," Alekseyeva believes.
However, prosecutors' claims to the work of the jury are not always unfounded.
According to Sergei Kovalyov, the head of the Memorial human rights group, sometimes disappointing failures can be identified in the work of jurors themselves, as they do not really know how this emerging institution of justice and civil society functions. However, the expert believes that this problem will be solved with time.
Georgy Zubovsky, the chairman of the Moscow Board of Lawyers, says Russia needs trial by jury. However, he believes people without any knowledge of civil law often become jurors. Apart from that, they are economically dependent and can be equally involved in a criminal conspiracy with the defense or the prosecution.
