Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T20:07:53.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part III - Challenges to Lay Participation in Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2021

Sanja Kutnjak Ivković
Michigan State University
Shari Seidman Diamond
Northwestern University, Illinois
Valerie P. Hans
Cornell University, New York
Nancy S. Marder
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Get access


Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Juries, Lay Judges, and Mixed Courts
A Global Perspective
, pp. 195 - 282
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Amietta, S. A. (2011). Governance in Córdoba’s mixed tribunal: A study on microphysics of power. Oñati Socio‐Legal Series, 1(1), 423. Scholar
Bergoglio, M. I. (2017). Ten years of mixed tribunals in Argentina. Scholar
Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. 5th ed. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Scholar
Burd, K., & Hans, V. P. (2018). Reasoned verdicts: Oversold? Cornell International Law Journal, 51, 319360.Google Scholar
Casper, G., & Zeisel, H. (1972). Lay judges in the German criminal courts. Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 135191. Scholar
Edwards, J., Haugerud, A., & Parikh, S. (2017). Introduction: The 2016 Brexit referendum and Trump election. American Ethnologist, 44, 195200. Scholar
Elden, J. C. (2017, May 7). Når Riksadvokaten svikter oss [When the attorney general fails us]. Dagbladet. Scholar
Fiva, H. (2006). In other words: A study of interpreting and power in Oslo. [Master’s thesis, University of Oslo]. Scholar
Foss, A. B. (2015, May 12). Stortinget fjerner juryen fra rettssalen [Parliament removes the jury from the courtroom]. Aftenposten. Scholar
Foss, M. T. (2011). Juryordningen: Rollefordelingen mellom fagdommere og lekdommere [The jury system: The distinction between the roles of professional judges and laymen]. [Master’s thesis, University of Tromsø].Google Scholar
Gullestad, M. (1992). The art of social relations: Essays on culture, social action and everyday life in modern Norway. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.Google Scholar
Hemsedal saken [Hemsedal case] (2016, July 7). No. LB-2015–85818, Borgarting lagmannsrett [Borgarting Court of Appeal].Google Scholar
Huuse, C., Røed, R., & Hansen, F. (2016, April 8). Tre menn frifunnet for gjengvoldtekt: Andrea Voll Voldum: De har tatt fra meg noe jeg aldri får tilbake [Three men acquitted of gang rape: Andrea Voll Voldum: “They have taken something from me that I’ll never get back”]. VG. Scholar
Jimeno-Bulnes, M. (2011). Jury selection and jury trial in Spain: Between theory and practice. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 1(9). Scholar
Jordal, P. (2011). Juryutvalget (Norges offentlige utredninger) [The Committee on Juries (Norwegian Official Reports)]. Departementenes servicesenter Informasjonsforvaltning. Oslo.Google Scholar
Kutnjak Ivković, S. (2007). Exploring lay participation in legal decision-making: Lessons from mixed tribunals. Cornell International Law Journal, 40, 429454.Google Scholar
Letvik, T. (2015). Grunnloven kunne berget juryordningen [The Constitution could have saved the jury system]. Juristkontakt(5). 05-19Google Scholar
Lov om endringer i straffeprosessloven mv. [Law about changes in Criminal Procedure Act (Nor.)] (2017), § 332. Scholar
Machura, S. (2016). Understanding the German mixed tribunal. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie: The German Journal of Law and Society, 36(2), 273302. Scholar
Mathisen, G. (2015, July 30). Forsvarerne gir opp jurykampen [The defenders give up the jury fight]. Advokaten. Scholar
Murschetz, V. (2009). The US jury system: An insight from a civil lawyer’s perspective. In Grabher, G. M. & Gamper, A, (Eds.), Legal narratives (pp. 159174). Vienna: Springer.–3-211–92818-9_8Google Scholar
Nygard, L.-J. (2010). Juryen for fall: Demokrati og rettssikkerhet [The jury before a fall: Democracy and legal certainty]. Oslo: Unipub.Google Scholar
Offit, A. (2016). Peer review: Navigating uncertainty in the United States jury system. UC Irvine Law Review, 2(6), 169206.Google Scholar
Offit, A.(2018). The jury is out: An ethnographic study of lay participation in the Norwegian legal system. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 41, 231246. Scholar
Olsen, T. (2016, August 5). Derfor kunne voldtektssaken i Hemsedal ende med frifinnelse [Why the rape case in Hemsedal could end in acquittal]. Aftenposten. Scholar
Olsson, S. V. (2019, January 28). Fagdommerne avviste juryens kjennelse: Hele saken må opp på nytt [The professional judges rejected the jury’s verdict: The whole case must be retried]. NRK. Scholar
Provine, D. M. (1986). Judging credentials: Nonlawyer judges and the politics of professionalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Roudik, P. (2011, November 9). Georgia: Courts with jurors established nationwide. Global Legal Monitor, Library of Congress. Scholar
Rundberget, A. (2017, February 3). Juryordningen: En symbolsak står for fall [The jury system: A symbolic issue comes before the fall]. Meninger.–-en-symbolsak-står-for-fall-14156152.eceGoogle Scholar
Sandvær, H. (2016, August 8). Meddommere i Hemsedal-saken trues: Er bekymret for rettssikkerheten [Lay judges in Hemsedal case threatened: Are anxious about the rule of law]. VG. Scholar
Scherr, C. (2015). Chasing democracy: The development and acceptance of jury trials in Argentina. University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 47, 316353.Google Scholar
Sigurd, S. (2016, August 9). Tidligere ordfører anmeldt for voldstrusler i Hemsedal-saken [Former mayor reported for violent threats in Hemsedal case]. NRK. Scholar
Sulland, F. (2016). Juridiske tungvektere med forskjellig syn [Legal heavyweights with different views]. Juristkontakt 5.Google Scholar
Skeie, J. (1939). Den norske straffeprosess [The Norwegian criminal procedure]. Oslo: Olaf Norlisforlag.Google Scholar
Skjevestad, H. (2016). Vil ha to fagdommere og fem lekdommere [Will have two professional judges and five lay judges]. Advokatforeningen Bladet. Scholar
Straffeprosessloven [Criminal Procedure Act (Nor.)]. 1981 Kap. 21 § 275, Kap. 22 § 276. Scholar
Belgium, Taxquet v., App. No. 926/05 (Eur. Ct. H.R., November 16, 2010). Scholar


A quoi sert le juge d’instruction? [What is the purpose of the investigating judge?] (2012, August 31). Scholar
Arrêté du 18 mars 2013 mettant fin à l’expérimentation des dispositions prévoyant la participation de citoyens assesseurs au fonctionnement de la justice pénale [Order of 18 March 2013 ending the experimentation of the provisions providing for the participation of citizen assessors in the functioning of the criminal justice system], March. 22, 2013, Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France], p. 4897.Google Scholar
Aubert, J. L., & Savaux, E. (2012). Introduction au droit [Introduction to law]. 14th ed. Paris: Sirey.Google Scholar
Benoit Frydman sur la réforme de la cour d’assises [Benoit Frydman on the reform of the assises court]. (2018, January 10).–01-2018?videoId=90318Google Scholar
Brafman, J. (2012, April 9). Justice: Nicolas Sarkozy table sur l’appel au peuple [Justice: Nicolas Sarkozy is counting on the call to the people]. Slate. Scholar
Centre Permanent pour la Citoyenneté et la Participation [Permanent Center for Citizenship and Participation (Belg.)]. (2016, June). Vers la fin du jury d’assises? [Toward the end of the assises jury?] Scholar
Chambre des représentants de Belgique [Belgian House of Representatives]. (2015). Projet de loi, modifiant le droit pénal et la procédure pénale et portant des dispositions diverses en matière de justice [Legislative bill modifying criminal law and criminal procedure and carrying various provisions in justice matters]. Scholar
Code de Procédure Pénale [Criminal Procedure Code], Art. 712–713, al. 2. (Fr.)Google Scholar
Code d’ Instruction Criminelle [Criminal Procedure Code] (Belg.). Scholar
Commission de réforme de la Cour d’assises [Commission on the Reform of the Assises Court (Belg.)]. (2005). Rapport définitif de la « Commission de réforme de la Cour d’assises » remis à madame la Ministre de la Justice le 23 décembre 2005 [Final report of the reform Commission of the Cour d’assises presented to Madam Minister of Justice, December 23, 2005]. Scholar
Conseil constitutionnel [Constitutional Court] Decision No. 2011–625 DC, Mar. 10, 2011, Rec. 122 (Fr.).Google Scholar
Conseil constitutionnelDecision No. 2017–694 QPC, Mar. 2, 2018 (Fr.).Google Scholar
Constitution (Belg.) (2007).Google Scholar
Cour constitutionelle [Constitutional Court] decision no 148/2017, Dec. 21, 2017, (Belg.)Google Scholar
De Charette, L. (2010, December 2). Les jurés siégeront en cours d’appel [Jurors will sit on courts of appeal]. Le Figaro. Scholar
Direction de l’information légale et administrative (Premier ministre), Ministère chargé de la justice [Directorate of Legal and Administrative Information (Prime Minister), Ministry of Justice (Fr.)] (2018). Déroulement d’un procès devant la cour d’assises [Trial proceedings before the assises court]. Scholar
Durançon, D. (2015). La Cour d’assises: Une juridiction séculaire et atypique en perpétuelle quête de renovation [The Assises Court: A secular and atypical jurisdiction, permanently looking for renovation]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Paris-Saclay.Google Scholar
Echevinage. Etudes Générales [Echevinage. General studies]. (2014). In Bibliographie de l’Histoire de la Justice Francaise (1789–2011) [Bibliography of the History of French Justice (1789–2011)]. Scholar
Egré, P., & Raisse, T. (2016, March 14). Délais d’audiencement: Les assises attendent le verdict [Court hearings delays: the assises courts are waiting for the verdict]. Le Parisien. Scholar
Faure, S. (2011, July 7). La loi sur les jurés populaires est paradoxale du point de vue de l’histoire [The law on popular juries is a paradox from the standpoint of history]. Liberation. Scholar
Garapon, A., & Papadopoulos, I. (2003). Juger en Amérique et en France [To judge in America and in France]. Paris: Odile Jacobs.Google Scholar
Geens, K. (2016). Correctionnalisation [Correctionalization]. Scholar
Geens, K.(2017, September 22). Assises « Trois juges et quatre jurés » [Assises courts: “Three judges and four jurors”]. Scholar
Germain, C. M. (2014, June). The rise and fall of lay participation in French criminal courts [Paper presentation]. 2014 Conference on Juries and Mixed Tribunals Across the Globe: New Developments, Common Challenges and Future Directions, Oñati, Spain.Google Scholar
Germain, C. M.(2017, Winter). Lay participation in the criminal jury: France and Belgium. RCSL Newsletter, 79. Scholar
Goffinon, J. (2011). Le jury populaire: Véritable juge ou simple expression de la démocratie [The popular jury: Real judge or simple expression of democracy]. Scholar
Hans, V. P., & Germain, C. M. (2011). The French jury at a crossroads. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 86, 737768.Google Scholar
Huyghe, M. S. (2011, June 15). Rapport fait au nom de la commission des lois constitutionnelles, de la législation et de l’administration générale de la république sur le projet de loi (No. 3452), adopté par le sénat après engagement de la procédure accélérée sur la participation des citoyens au fonctionnement de la justice pénale et le jugement des mineurs [Report written in the name of the commission of constitutional laws, of legislation and of the general administration of the republic on the legislative bill (No. 3452) adopted by the senate after the fast-track procedure on the participation of citizens to the functioning of criminal justice and judgment of minors]. Assemblée nationale. Scholar
Jacquin, J. B. (2018, March 9). Nicole Belloubet veut un « tribunal criminel » à la place des assises [Nicole Belloubet wants a “criminal tribunal,” instead of the assises court]. Le Monde. Scholar
Lederman, C. (1997). Jures d’assises et magistrats [Assises jurors and judges].,382Google Scholar
Loi 2000–516 du 15 juin 2000 renforçant la protection de la présomption d’innocence et les droits des victims [Law 2000–516 of June 15, 2000, on strengthening the protection of the presumption of innocence and the rights of victims]. Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France], June 16, 2000, p. 9038.Google Scholar
Loi 2011–939 du 10 août 2011 sur la participation des citoyens au fonctionnement de la justice pénale et le jugement des mineurs [Law 2011–939 of August 10, 2011, on the participation of citizens in the functioning of criminal justice and the adjudication of minors]. Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France], August 11, 2011, p. 13744.Google Scholar
Loi 2014–535 du 27 mai 2014 portant transposition de la directive 2012/13/UE du Parlement européen et du Conseil, du 22 mai 2012, relative au droit à l’information dans le cadre des procédures pénales [Law 2014–535 of May 27, 2014, transposing Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of May 22, 2012, on the right to information in criminal proceedings]. Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France], May 28, 2014, p. 8864.Google Scholar
Loi 2016–731 du 3 juin 2016 renforçant la lutte contre le crime organisé, le terrorisme et leur financement, et améliorant l’efficacité et les garanties de la procédure pénale [Law 2016–731 of June 3, 2016, strengthening the fight against organized crime, terrorism and their financing, and improving the effectiveness and guarantees of criminal proceedings]. Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France], June 4, 2016. Scholar
Loi 2019–222 du 23 mars 2019 de programmation 2018–2022 et de réforme pour la justice [Law No. 2019–222 of March 23, 2019, planning for 2018–2022 and justice reform]. Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France]. Scholar
Loi du 7 mai 1999 modification à la constitution [Law of May 7, 1999, on modifying the Constitution]. Moniteur Belge [Official Gazette of Belgium], May 29, 1999, p. 19310.Google Scholar
Loi du 25 novembre 1941 sur le jury [Law of November 25, 1941, on the jury]. Journal Officiel de la République Française [Official Gazette of France], December 12, 1941, p. 5355.Google Scholar
Loi modifiant le droit pénal et la procédure pénale et portant des dispositions diverses en matière de justice [Law amending criminal law and criminal procedure and providing miscellaneous provisions on justice], February 5, 2016. Moniteur Belge [Official Gazette of Belgium], Feb. 19, 2016, p. 13130.Google Scholar
Ministère de la Justice [Ministry of Justice (Fr.)]. (2011–2012). Statistiques pénales [Criminal statistics]. Paris.Google Scholar
Ministère de la Justice(2013, March 1). L’expérimentation des citoyens assesseurs évaluée [The experiment of citizen assessors as judges assessed]. Scholar
Ministère de la Justice(2016). Les chiffres-clés de la Justice 2016 [Justice 2016 key numbers]. Secrétariat general, Service support et moyens du ministère, Sous-direction de la Statistique et des Études. Scholar
Neuer, L. (2012, May 5). “Jurés Populaires” en correctionnelle: Premier bilan en demi teinte [“Popular juries” in the criminal tribunal: First mixed assessment]. Le Point.–05-2012–1458403_56.phpGoogle Scholar
Ordre des barreaux Francophones et Germanophones de Belgique [Belgian Bar Association for French and German speakers]. Pot-Pourri II. (2016, September 8). La Tribune. Scholar
Pradel, J. (2001). L’appel contre les arrêts d’assises: un apport heureux de la loi du 15 juin 2000 [Appeal against assises verdicts: A welcome contribution of the law of June 15, 2000]. Recueil Dalloz, 1964–1972.Google Scholar
Pradel, J.(2010). Procédure pénale [Criminal procedure]. Recueil Dalloz, 34, 22542263.Google Scholar
Pradel, J.(2011a). La Cour de Strasbourg n’impose finalement qu’une motivation minimale aux cours d’assises statuant avec des jurés [The Strasbourg Court finally only imposes a minimal ground for decision requirement to the assises court sitting with jurors]. Recueil Dalloz, 1, 4850.Google Scholar
Pradel, J.(2011b, September 5). Le citoyen comme juge pénal: A propos de la loi de 10 août 2011 [The citizen as criminal judge: About the law of August 10, 2011]. La Semaine Juridique – Edition générale, 1534.Google Scholar
Pradel, J.(2018, April 2) Plaidoyer pour la création d’un tribunal criminel sans jurés [Plea for the creation of a criminal tribunal without any jurors]. Semaine Juridique – Edition Générale, 377.Google Scholar
Rastello, C. (2012, January 4). Jurés populaires en correctionnelle: une fausse bonne idée? [Popular juries in the criminal tribunal: a false good idea?] L’Obs. Scholar
Reasonable doubt (n.d.). In Black’s Law Dictionary. 2nd ed. Scholar
Redon, M. (2013). Cour d’assises: Un répertoire de droit pénal et procédure pénale [The Assise Court: A directory of criminal law and criminal procedure]. Paris: Dalloz.Google Scholar
Réju, E. (2012, January 1). Associer les citoyens, c’est faire oeuvre de pédagogie [To involve the citizens is a pedagogical endeavor]. La Croix. Scholar
Salas, D. (2001). Juger en démocratie [To judge in a democracy]. In La Cour d’assises: Bilan d’un héritage démocratique [The Assises Court: State of a democratic heritage] (pp. 721). Paris: La Documentation française.Google Scholar
Salvat, X., & Boccon-Gibod, D. (2013, February). L’expérimentation des citoyens assesseurs dans les resorts des cours d’appel de Dijon et Toulouse [The experiment of the citizen assessors in the courts of appeals of Dijon and Toulouse]. Scholar
Sénat [Senate (Fr.)] (2011). Etude d’Impact: Projet de loi sur la participation des citoyens au fonctionnement de la justice pénale et le jugement des mineurs [Impact Study: Legislative bill on the participation of citizens in the functioning of criminal justice and the judgment of minors]. Scholar
Taxquet v. Belgique [G.C.], 2010-VI Eur. Ct. H.R. 105.Google Scholar
Vansiliette, F. (2016, September 30). La Cour d’Assises: vers une lente agonie? [The Assises Court: Toward a slow agony?]. Justice en Ligne. Scholar
Wauters, L. (2016, October 8). Koen Geens veut résusciter les Assises [Koen Geens wants to resurrect the assises courts]. Scholar


Afanas’ev, A. K. (1978). Sostav suda prisiazhnykh v Rossii [Composition of juries in Russia]. Voprosy istorii, 6, 199203.Google Scholar
Afanas’ev, A. K.(2003). Sud prisiazhnykh v Rossii [Trial by jury in Russia]. Otechestvennye zapiski, 2. Scholar
Bhat, G. N. (1997). The moralization of guilt in late imperial Russian trial by jury: The early reform era. Law and History Review, 15(1), 77114.Google Scholar
Bobrishchev-Pushkin, A. M. (1896). Empiricheskie zakony deiatel’nosti russkago suda prisiazhnykh [Empirical laws of the Russian jury trial]. Moscow: Pechatnia A. I. Snegirevoi.Google Scholar
Browder, R. P., & Kerensky, A. F. (Eds.). (1961). The Russian Provisional Government, 1917: Documents. In three volumes. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bukov, V. A. (1997). Ot rossiiskogo suda prisiazhnykh k proletarskomu pravosudiiu: u istokov totalitarizma [From the Russian jury trial to the proletariat justice: At the origins of totalitarianism]. Moscow: Arkheograficheskii tsentr.Google Scholar
Chebyshev-Dmitriev, A. P. (1875a). Russkoe ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo po sudebnym ustavam 20 noiabria 1864 g [Russian criminal procedure on the Judicial Codes of November 20, 1864]. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel’stvo V. P. Pechatkina.Google Scholar
Chebyshev-Dmitriev, A. P.(1875b). Sistematicheskii svod reshenii kassatsionnykh departamentov Senata 1866–1875 gg. s podlinnym tekstov reshenii, izvlechennymi iz nikh tezisami i kriticheskim razborom ikh: v 3-kh tomakh, Tom III: Resheniia ugolovnovnogo Kassatsionnogo Departamenta, raz’iasniaiushchie Ustav ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [A systematic collection of decisions of the cassation departments of the Senate 1866–1875 with the original text of the decisions, abstracts extracted from them and critical analysis of them, Volume 3: Decisions of the Criminal Court of Cassation explaining the Code of Criminal Procedure]. Saint Petersburg.Google Scholar
Cheltsov-Bebutov, M. A. (1995). Kurs ugolovno-protsessual’nogo prava: Ocherki po istorii suda i ugolovnogo protsessa v rabovladel’cheskikh, feodal’nykh i burzhuaznykh gosudarstvakh [The course of the Criminal Procedural Law: Essays on history of court and criminal procedure in slaveholding, feudal and bourgeois states]. Saint Petersburg: Alfa.Google Scholar
Demichev, A. A. (2001). Periodizatsiia istorii suda prisiazhnykh v Rossii [Periodization of the history of the jury trial in Russia]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava, 7, 137150.Google Scholar
Demichev, A. A.(2003). Sravnitel’no pravovoe issledovanie suda prisiazhnykh v Rossii (Istoriia i sovremennost) [Comparative legal analysis of the jury trial in Russia (History and modern period)]. Unpublished Doctoral of Jurisprudence dissertation, Nizhegorodskaia Academy of the Ministry of the Interior (MVD), Russia.Google Scholar
Donovan, J. M. (2010). Juries and the transformation of criminal justice in France. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Dudko, N. A. (2013). Poetapnoe vvedenie suda prisiazhnykh v Rossii [Phased introduction of the jury trial in Russia]. Barnaul: Izdatel’stvo Altaiskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta.Google Scholar
Dzhanshiev, G. A. (2004). Osnovy sudebnoi reform [Judicial reform framework]. Moscow: Statut.Google Scholar
Efremova, N. N. (2008). Reorganizatsiia rossiiskoi iustitsii v epokhu prosveshcheniia [Reorganization of the Russian justice in the enlightenment era]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava, 3, 135148.Google Scholar
Esmein, A. (1913). A history of continental criminal procedure: With special reference to France. Translated by Simpson, J. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii o vvedenii v deistvie ugolovno-protsessual’nogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Federal Law of the Russian Federation on the introduction of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation], No. 177-FZ, December 18, 2001.Google Scholar
Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii o vnesenii izmenenii v Federal’nyi zakon o vvedenii v deistvie ugolovno-protsessual’nogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Federal Law of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Federal Law on introduction of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation], No. 181–FZ, December 27, 2002.Google Scholar
Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii o vnesenii izmenenii v otdel’nye zakonodatel’nye akty Rossiiskoi Federatsii po voprosam protivodeistviia terrorizmu [Federal Law of the Russian Federation on amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation counteractions against terrorism], No. 321–FZ, December 30, 2008.Google Scholar
Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii o primenenii polozhenii Ugolovnogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii i Ugolovno-portsessual’nogo kodeksa Rossiiskoi Federatsii na territoriiakh Respubliki Krym i goroda federal’nogo znacheniia Sevastopolia [Federal Law of the Russian Federation on the application of provisions of the Criminal Code and Code of the Criminal Procedure on the territory of Crimea and the city of federal importance Sebastopol], No. 91-FZ, May 5, 2014.Google Scholar
Federal’nyi Zakon Rossiiskoi Federatsii o vnesenii izmenenii v Ugolovno-protsessual’nyi kodeks Rossiiskoi Federatsii v sviazi s rasshireniem primeneniia institute prisiazhnykh zasedatelei [Federal Law of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure with regard to expansion of the application of jury trial], No. 190-FZ, June 23, 2016.Google Scholar
Ferguson, A. G. (2014). The jury as constitutional identity. University of California Davis Law Review, 47, 11051171.Google Scholar
Foinitskii., I. Ya. (1996). Kurs ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [Criminal procedure course]. 2 vols. Saint Petersburg: Alfa.Google Scholar
Gessen, I. V. (1905). Sudebnaia reforma [Judicial reform]. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia F. Vaisberga & P. Gershunina.Google Scholar
Golunskii, S. A. (Ed.). (1955). Istoriia zakonodatel’stva SSSR i RSFSR po ugolovnomu protsessu i organizatsii suda i prokuratury, 1917–1954 gg: Sbornik dokumentov [History of legislation of the USSR and RSFSR on criminal procedure and organization of courts and prosecutors office, 1917–1954: Compilation of documents]. Moscow: Gos. izd. iurid. lit-ry.Google Scholar
Iasel’skaia, V. V., & Grishchenko, A. V. (2018). Sostiazatel’naia deiatel’nost’ zashchitnika na etape formirovaniia kollegii prisiazhnykh zasedatelei [Adversarial advocacy of the defense counsel at the jury selection stage]. Ugolovnaia iustitsiia, 11, 119123.Google Scholar
Istraty, V. V. (2015). Sotsial’naia terminologiia v russkom perevode traktata W. Blackstona “Istolkovania aglinskikh zakonov” [Social terminology in the Russian translation of W. Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England”]. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana: Trudy Instituta lingvisticheskikh issledovanii, 11(3), 635659.Google Scholar
Jackson, J., & Kovalev, N. (2016). Lay adjudication in Europe: The rise and fall of the traditional jury. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 6, 368395.Google Scholar
Karnozova, L. M. (2000). Vozrozhdennyi sud prisiazhnykh: Zamysel i problemy stanovleniia [Resurrected jury trial: Design and problems of becoming]. Moscow: Nota Bene.Google Scholar
Karnozova, L. M.(2001). Sudebnaia reforma: Problem i perspektivy [Judicial reform: Problems and prospects]. Moscow: Institut gosudarstva i prava, RAN.Google Scholar
Konstitutsiia (Osnovkoi Zakon) RSFSR [Constitution of the RSFSR] (1978/1992), with amendments as of December 10, 1992. Scholar
Konstitutsiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Constitution of the Russian Federation] (1993), adopted December 12, 1993.–02.htmGoogle Scholar
Korotkikh, M. G. (1989). Samoderzhavie i sudebnaia reforma 1864 g. v Rossii [Autocracy and judicial reform of 1864 in Russia]. Voronezh: Izdatel’stvo voronezhskogo universiteta.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N. (2010). Criminal justice reform in Russia, Ukraine, and the Former Republics of the Soviet Union. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N.(2014). Selection of jurors and lay assessors in comparative perspective. Russian Law Journal, 2, 962.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N., & Smirnov, A. (2014). The nature of the Russian trial by jury: “Jury patriae” or “raison d’état.European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 22, 115133.Google Scholar
Kozak, D. (2001, May 17). Sud prosiazhnykh budet vveden [Jury trials will be introduced]. Nezavisimaia gazeta, No. 86 (2396).–05-17/3_news.htmlGoogle Scholar
Kozhevnikov, M. V. (1957). Istoriia sovetskogo suda 1917–1956 gody [History of the Soviet court 1917–1956]. Moscow: Gosiurizdat.Google Scholar
Kucherov, S. (1970). The organs of Soviet administration of justice: Their history and operation. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Levada-Center. (2018, October 22). Institutional trust [Press release].–4Google Scholar
Lloyd-Bostock, S., & Thomas, C. (2000). The continuing decline of the English jury. In Vidmar, N (Ed.), World jury systems (pp. 5391). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacKay, R. (2016). Jury nullification: The quality of mercy is not strained. Criminal Law Quarterly, 63, 80101.Google Scholar
Mel’nik, V. V. (2003). Iskusstvo zashchity v sude prisiazhnykh [The art of defense in jury trials]. Moscow: Delo.Google Scholar
Nager, B. R. (1964). The jury that tried William Penn. American Bar Association Journal, 50(2), 168170.Google Scholar
Nasonov, S. A. (2014). Jury selection: Problems of legal regulation and judicial practice. Current Problems of the Russian Law, 12(49), 28412846.Google Scholar
Nasonov, S. A.(Ed.). (2016a). Sud prisiazhnykh i advokatura v Rossii, Tom I: Vvedenie i razvitie suda prisiazhnykh [Jury trial and the bar in Russia, Volume 1: Introduction and development of the jury trial]. Moscow: Federal’naia palata advokatov Rossiiskoi Federatsii.Google Scholar
Nasonov, S. A.(2016b). Istoricheskie modeli proizvodstva v sude prisiazhnykh [Historical models of trial by jury]. Moscow: Bibliotechka grazhdanskogo obshchestva.Google Scholar
Nemytina, M. V. (1995). Rossiiski sud prisiazhnykh [Russian jury trial]. Moscow: BEK.Google Scholar
Nikitinskii, L. (2019, June 26). V usloviiakh neochevidnosti: Kak vidimost’ v sude prisiazhnykh izmeniaetsia v zavisimosti ot togo, predstavliaet li svoi argumenty zashchita ili obvinenie [How the appearance in jury trial varies depending on whether the defense or the prosecution presents its arguments]. Novaia gazeta, No. 68. Scholar
Pashin, S. A., & Karnozova, L. M. (Eds.). (1996). Sostiazatel’noe pravosudie [Adversarial justice]. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnyi komitet sodeistviia pravosudiia.Google Scholar
Pereira, N. G. O. (1983). Tsar-Liberator: Alexander II of Russia, 1818–1881. Newtonville, MA: Oriental Research Partners.Google Scholar
Pervyi sud prisiazhnykh v Krymu: Vinovny v razboe i ubiistve [First jury trial in Crimea: Guilty of robbery and murder]. (2018, March 23). ForPost. Scholar
Popova, A. D. (2016). Demokratiia, pravosudie, grazhdanskoe obshchestvo: Stanovlenie i vzaimodeistvie [Democracy, justice and civil society: Formation and interaction]. Moskva: Prospekt.Google Scholar
Raeff, M. (1966). The Decembrist movement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Reed, J. T. (1996). Penn, Zenger and O.J.: Jury nullification – Justice of the wacko fringe’s attempt to further its anti-government agenda. Duquesne Law Review, 34, 11251140.Google Scholar
Shcheglovitov, S. G. (1887). Sudebnye Ustavy imperatora Alexandra Vtorogo s zakonodatel’nymi motivami i raz’iasneniiami: Ustav ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Stasiulevicha.Google Scholar
Shramchenko, M. V., & Shirkov, V. P. (Eds.). (1913). Ustav ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva s pozdneishimi uzakoneniiami, zakonodatel’nymi motivami, raz’iasneniiami Pravitel’stvuiushchego Senata i tsirkuliarami Ministra iustitsii [Code of criminal procedure with the latest legalization, legislative motives, clarifications of the Governing Senate and circulars of the minister of justice]. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie Iuridicheskogo Knizhnogo Magazina N.K. Martynova.Google Scholar
Sluchevskii, V. (1910). Uchebnik russkago ugolovnogo protsessa [Textbook on criminal procedure]. 3rd ed. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia M. M. Stasiulevicha.Google Scholar
Stetsovskii, Iu. I. (1999). Sudebnaia vlast [Judicial power]. Moscow: Delo.Google Scholar
Sudebnaia kollegiia po ugolovnym delam Verkhovnogo Suda [Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation]. (2013). Apelliatsionnoe opredelenie [Appellate decision], July 9, No. 32-APU13-7sp. Consultant Plus. - 0023860874661191245Google Scholar
Sudebnyi Departament pri Verkhovnom Sude Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation]. (2018). Otchet ob itogakh deiatel’nosti Departamenta pri Verkhovnom Sude Rossiiskoi Federatsii za 2017 god [2017 annual report of the activities of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation]. Scholar
Sudebnyi Departament pri Verkhovnom Sude Rossiiskoi Federatsii(2019a). Otchet ob itogakh deiatel’nosti Departamenta pri Verkhovnom Sude Rossiiskoi Federatsii za 2018 god [2018 annual report of the activities of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation]. Scholar
Sudebnyi Departament pri Verkhovnom Sude Rossiiskoi Federatsii(2019b). Sudebnaia statistika [Judicial statistics]. Scholar
Surin, A. V. (Ed.). (2008). Klassiki teorii gosudarstvennogo upravleniia: Upravlencheskie idei v Rossii [Classics of theory of public administration: Governance ideas in Russia]. Moskow: Rosspen.Google Scholar
Ternovskii, N. A. (1901). Iuridicheskie osnovaniia k suzhdeniiu o sile dokazatel’stv i mysli iz rechei predsedatel’stvuiushchego po ugolovnym delam [Legal reasons for judgment on strength of evidence and opinions from the jury instructions of the presiding judge in criminal cases]. Tula: Tipografia V. N. Sokolova.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C. (1995). The resurrection of trial by jury in Russia. Stanford Journal of International Law, 31, 61274.Google Scholar
Ugolovno-protsessual’nyi kodeks RSFSR v redaktsii zakona ot 1993 [Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR] (1993).Google Scholar
Ugolovno-protsessual’nyi kodeks Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation] (2001).Google Scholar
Ustav ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva [Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Empire] (1864), adopted November 20, 1864.Google Scholar
Varfolomeev, Yu. V. (2011). Advokaty vo vlasti: prisiazhnye poverennye – sotrudniki Chrezvychainoi sledstvennoi komissii Vremennogo pravitel’stva [Lawyers in the state power: Attorneys – employees of the Extraordinary Investigation Commission of Provisional Government]. Advokat, 6, 6070.Google Scholar
Vasil’ev, A., & Baranosvkii, A. (2017). Sud prisiazhnykh: poslednii shans femidy [Trial by jury: The last Themis’ chance]. Moscow: Izdate’skie Reshenia.Google Scholar
Vasil’eva, E. V. (2013). Programmy politicheskikh partii Rossii kontsa XIX-nachala XX vv [Programs of political parties of Russia at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries]. Omsk: SibADI.Google Scholar
Verkhovnyi Sud Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Supreme Court of the Russian Federation], Postanovlenie Plenum: O nekotorykh voprosakh primeneniia sudami ugolovno-portsessual’nykh norm, reglamentiruiushchikh proizvodstvo v sude prisiazhnykh [Decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on issues of rules regulating jury trials], No. 9, December 20, 1994. Scholar
Kassatsionnoe opredelenie Verkhovnogo suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii [Cassational decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation], No. 25-011-4SP, March 23, 2011. - 05617412749405002Google Scholar
Vidmar, N. (Ed.). (2000a). World jury systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vidmar, N.(2000b). The jury elsewhere in the world. In Vidmar, N (Ed.), World jury systems (pp. 421447). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vilkova, T. Iu., & Nasonov, S. A. (2017). Printsip uchastiia grazhdan v osushchestvlenii pravosudiia v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [The principle of lay participation in criminal justice]. Moscow: Iurait.Google Scholar
Zakon ot 16 iulia 1993 g. No. 5451-I “O vnesenii izmenenii i dopolnenii v Zakon RSFSR ‘O sudoustroistve RSFSR’, Ugolovno-protsessual’nyi kodeks RSFSR, Ugolovnyi kodeks RSFSR i Kodeks ob administrativnykh pravonarusheniiakh” [Law of July 16, 1993 No. 5451-I “On amendments to the Law of the RSFSR” on the Judicial System of the RSFSR, Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR, Criminal Code of the RSFSR and Code of Administrative Offences].Google Scholar


American Bar Association/Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative. (2005). Judicial reform index for Georgia. Washington, DC: ABA.Google Scholar
Beachain, O. D., & Polese, A. (Eds). (2010). The colour revolutions in the former Soviet republics: Successes and failures. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Black’s Law Dictionary (2009). 9th ed. St. Paul, MN: West.Google Scholar
Cape, E., Namoradze, Z., Smith, R., & Spronken, T. (2010). Effective criminal defence in Europe. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Davitashvili, G. (2003). Sasamartlo mt’kicebulebani kartul chveulebit samartalshi სასამართლო მტკიცებულებანი ქართულ ჩვეულებით სამართალში [The judicial evidences in Georgian customary law]. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University.Google Scholar
Diamond, S. S., Rose, M. R., & Murphy, B. (2014). Embedded experts on real juries: A delicate balance. William & Mary Law Review, 55, 885933.Google Scholar
Dolidze, A. (2015). Napits msajulta sasamartlo sakartveloshi da misi shesabamisoba adamianis uplebata evrop’ul k’onventsiastan ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლო საქართველოში და მისი შესაბამისობა ადამიანის უფლებათა ევროპულ კონვენციასთან [Jury trials in Georgia and their compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights]. In Korkelia, K (Ed.), Adamianis uplebebi da samartlis uzenaesoba ადამიანის უფლებები და სამართლის უზენაესობა [European standards of human rights and their influence on Georgian legislation and practice] (pp. 4359). Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University Press.Google Scholar
Freedom House. (2019). Freedom in the world, Georgia. Scholar
Gharibashvili, I. (2015). P’remieri Gharibashvili: Napits msajulta inst’it’ut’ma sruli k’rakhi ganitsada პრემიერი ღარიბაშვილი: ნაფიც მსაჯულთა ინსტიტუტმა სრული კრახი განიცადა [A public statement by Prime Minister Gharibashvili: The jury institute has suffered a complete setback]. Tabula. Scholar
Gleadow, C. (2000). History of trial by jury in the Spanish legal system. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Gruzenberg, M. O. (1917). Sud prisiazhknykh v zakavkazie [Jury trials in Transcaucasia]. Tiflis: Tipografia Kantseliarii Osobogo Zakavkazskogo Komiteta.Google Scholar
Gupta, P., Kleinfeld, R., & Salinas, G. (2002). Legal and judicial reform in Europe and Central Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank, Operations Evaluation Department.Google Scholar
Herrmann, J. (2002). Comments on the Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Institute of Social Researches. (2009). Sabaziso codnisa da aghkmis k’vleva sasamartlo sist’emis shesakheb საბაზისო ცოდნისა და აღქმის კვლევა სასამართლო სისტემის შესახებ [Basic knowledge and perceptions concerning courts in Georgia]. Scholar
Jackson, J. D., and Kovalev, N. (2016). Lay adjudication in Europe: The rise and fall of the traditional jury. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 6, 368395.Google Scholar
Javakhishvili, I. (1982). Sakartvelos ist’oria, t’omi 6 საქართველოს ისტორია, ტომი 6 [History of Georgia, Vol. 6]. Tbilisi: Mecniereba.Google Scholar
Jones, S. F. (1988). The establishment of Soviet power in Transcaucasia: The case of Georgia 1921–1928. Soviet Studies, 11(4), 616639.Google Scholar
Jones, S. F.(2005). Socialism in Georgian colors: The European road to social democracy, 1883–1917. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kakabadze, S. (1997). Kartveli khalkhis ist’oria 1783–1921 ts’lebshi ქართველი ხალხის ისტორია 1783–1921 წლებში [History of the Georgian people 1783–1921]. Tbilisi: Nekeri.Google Scholar
Kavkazskaia Arkheograficheskaia Komissiia [Caucasus Archeological Commission]. (1866). Akty sobrannye Kavkazskoi Arkheograficheskoi Komissieiu [Documents collected by Caucasus Archeological Commission], Vol. 1. Edited by Berzhe, A. P.. Tiflis: Tipografia Glavnogo Upravleniia Namestnika Kavkazkogo.Google Scholar
Kikvadze, A. (1959). Sakartvelos ist’oria XIX–XX ss, ts’igni 2: 1861–1921 საქართველოს ისტორია : XIX–XX სს. : წიგნი 2 : 1861–1921 წწ [History of Georgia, XIX–XX centuries, Book 2]. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University Press.Google Scholar
King, George V (1913). Dzeglis dadeba giorgi brts’q’invalis mier ძეგლის დადება გიორგი ბრწყინვალის მიერ [Book of Law “Dzeglisdeba”]. Edited by Kakabadze, S. Tbilisi: S. M. Losaberidze.Google Scholar
K’onstitutsiuri k’vlevebis tsentri კონსტიტუციური კვლევების ცენტრი [Center for Constitutional Research]. (2018). Mediis monitoringis angarishi მედიის მონიტორინგის ანგარიში [Media monitoring report].–2018Google Scholar
K’onstitutsiuri k’vlevebis tsent’ri, martlmsajulebis ganvitarebisa da samartlebrivi sts’avlebis cent’ri da adamianis uplebebis erovnuli inst’it’ut’i კონსტიტუციური კვლევების ცენტრი, მართლმსაჯულების განვითარებისა და სამართლებრივი სწავლების ცენტრი და ადამიანის უფლებების ეროვნული ინსტიტუტი [Center for Constitutional Research, the Judicial Empowerment and Legal Education Center & the National Human Rights Institute at Free University]. (2015). Gantskhadeba napits msajulta sasamartlostan dak’avshirebit dagegmili tsvlilebebis shesakheb განცხადება ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლოსთან დაკავშირებით დაგეგმილი ცვლილებების შესახებ [Joint statement about the intended changes in the jury trial provisions]. Scholar
Korff, D. (2005). Comments on amendments to the Georgian Criminal Procedure Code and the draft New Georgian Criminal Procedure Code (as formulated in December 2005). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N. (2010). Criminal justice reform in Russia, Ukraine, and the Former Republics of the Soviet Union: Trial by jury and mixed courts. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N. (2015). Analysis of the draft law of Georgia amending the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia with regards to jury trials. Report prepared for the Open Society Georgia Foundation, Tbilisi.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N., & Meladze, G. (2015, October 13). Authors’ meeting with judges at the Supreme Court of Georgia.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N., & Smirnov, A. (2014). The nature of the Russian trial by jury: Jurata Patriae or Raison d’Etat. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 22(2), 115133.Google Scholar
Leigh, L. (2002). Comments on the Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Lekveishvili, M. (2013). Napits msajulta inst’it’ut’is sakmianoba tbilisis sakalako sasamartloshi ნაფიც მსაჯულთა ინსტიტუტის საქმიანობა თბილისის საქალაქო სასამართლოში [The operation of the jury trials in Tbilisi City Court]. In Napits msajulta inst’it’ut’i sakartveloshi ნაფიც მსაჯულთა ინსტიტუტი საქართველოში [The trial by jury in Georgia] (pp. 146161; English translation, pp. 457467). Tbilisi: Iverioni.Google Scholar
Light, M. (2014). Police reforms in the Republic of Georgia: The convergence of domestic and foreign policy in an anti-corruption drive. Policing and Society, 24(3), 318345.Google Scholar
Lomsadze, G. (2010, October 1). Georgia: Jury trials aim to bolster public confidence in courts. Eurasianet. Scholar
Mchedlishvili, Z. (2015, June 8). Sud prisiazhnykh razocharoval prem’er-ministra Gruzii [The jury trial disappointed prime minister of Georgia]. Ekho Kavkaza. Scholar
Meladze, G. (2007). Law and revolution: Formation of the new legal tradition in Georgia. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 6(3). Scholar
Minister of Education and Science of Georgia. (2016). 2018–2024 ts’lebis erovnuli sasts’avlo gegma damt’k’itsebulia sakartvelos ganatlebisa da metsnierebis minist’ris 2016 ts’lis №40 brdzanebit 2018–2024 სასწავლო წლების ეროვნული სასწავლო გეგმა დამკიცებულია საქართველოს განათლებისა და მეცნიერების მინისტრის 2016 წლის №40/ნ ბრძანებით [National education goals document for 2018–24 (National educational goals, adopted by Minister of Education and Science Decree #40, 2016)]. Scholar
Mytton, E., & Meladze, G. (2006). Legal education in transition: A study from Georgia. Scholar
Nasonov, S. A. (2015). Evropeiiskie modeli proizvodstva v sude prisiazhnykh v Gruzii (sravnitel’no-pravovoe issledovanie) [European models of the proceedings in the trial by jury in Georgia (comparative legal studies)]. Aktual’nye problem rossiskogo prava, 6(55), 163169.Google Scholar
Netgazeti (2017). Okrop’iridze sakartvelos ts’inaaghdeg ოქროპირიძე საქართველოს წინააღმდეგ [Okropiridze v. Georgia]. Scholar
Nikolo, M. (2007). Napits msajulta mimart sazogadoebis inpormirebuloba da chartuloba ნაფიც მსაჯულთა მიმართ საზოგადოების ინფორმირებულობა და ჩართულობა [Awareness of and participation in jury trial]. Scholar
Papuashvili, G. (2012). The 1921 Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Georgia: Looking back after ninety years. European Public Law, 18, 323350.Google Scholar
Piacentini, L., & Slade, G. (2015). Architecture and attachment: Carceral collectivism and the problem of prison reform in Russia and Georgia. Theoretical Criminology, 19(2), 179197.Google Scholar
Pondi ghia sazogadoeba sakartvelo ფონდი ღია საზოგადოება საქართველო) [Open Society Georgia Foundation]. (2015). Roundtable on jury trials. October 16, Tbilisi. Unpublished notes, on file with authors.Google Scholar
Popjanevski, J. (2015). Retribution and the rule of law: The politics of justice in Georgia. Silk Road Paper. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program. Scholar
Roudik, P. (2011). Georgia: Courts with jurors established nationwide. Global Legal Monitor. Scholar
Sakartvelos akhalgazrda iurist’ta asotsiatsia საქართველოს ახალგაზრდა იურისტთა ასოციაცია) [Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association]. (2016, June 22). The GYLA responds to legislative changes related to the jury system. Scholar
Sakartvelos k’onst’it’utsia საქართველოს კონსტიტუცია [Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Georgia] (1921), adopted on February 21, 1921.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos k’onst’it’utsia საქართველოს კონსტიტუცია [Constitution of Georgia] (1995), adopted on August 24, 1995, with amendments as of March 23, 2018.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos p’rezidentis gank’arguleba No. 914 საქართველოს პრეზიდენტის განკარგულება No. 914 [Presidential Decree of Georgia No. 914] (2004).Google Scholar
Sakartvelos siskhlis samartlis k’odeksi საქართველოს სისხლის სამართლის კოდექსი [Criminal Code of Georgia] (1999), adopted on July 22, 1999, No. 2287. Arts. 108, 109, 117(2), (4), (6), and (8), 126(2), 135-1, 143(2-4), 143-1, 143-2, 143-3(2-4), 144-2, 146(2), 147, 149, 197(4), 198(3), 229.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos siskhlis samartlis sap’rotseso k’odeksi საქართველოს სისხლის სამართლის საპროცესო კოდექსი [Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia] (1998), adopted on February 20, 1998.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos siskhlis samartlis sap’rotseso k’odeksi საქართველოს სისხლის სამართლის საპროცესო კოდექსი [Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia] (2009), adopted on October 9, 2009, No. 1772.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos uzenaesi sasamartlo საქართველოს უზენაესი სასამართლო [Supreme Court of Georgia]. (2012). Napits msajulta sasamartlo ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლო [Jury trials]. Scholar
Sakartvelos uzenaesi sasamartlo(2014). Sasamartlo sist’emis reporma sakartveloshi სასამართლო სისტემის რეფორმა საქართველოში [Judiciary reform in Georgia]. Scholar
Sakartvelos uzenaesi sasamartlo (2020). Napits msajulta sasamartlo damouk’idebel sakartveloshi ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლო დამოუკიდებელ საქართველოში (1917–1921 წწ) [Jury court in independent Georgia (1917–1921)]. Scholar
Sakhalkho Sakme (1920, February 20). [Georgian newspaper].Google Scholar
Slade, G. (2013). Reorganizing crime: Mafia and anti-Mafia in post-Soviet Georgia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sofronenko, K. A. (1967). Istoriia gosudarstva i prava SSSR, Chast 1 [History of state and law of USSR, Vol. 1]. Moscow: Iuridicheskaia literatura.Google Scholar
Solomon, P. H., & Foglesong, T. S. (2000). Courts and transition in Russia: The challenge of judicial reform. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Tanovich, D. M., Paciocco, D. M., & Skurka, S. (1997). Jury selection in criminal trials. Toronto: Irwin Law.Google Scholar
Belgium, Taxquet v., Application No. 926/05 (January 13, 2009).Google Scholar
Belgium, Taxquet v., Application No. 926/05 (November 16, 2010).Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C. (2002a). Japan’s new system of mixed courts: Some suggestions regarding their future form and procedures. Saint Louis-Warsaw Transatlantic Law Journal, 2001–2002, 89117.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C. (2002b). Latin America’s first modern system of lay participation: The reform of inquisitorial justice in Venezuela. In Donatsch, A, Forster, M, & Schwarzenegger, C (Eds.), Strafrecht, Strafprozessrecht und Menschenrechte: Festschrift für Stefan Trechsel [Criminal law, criminal procedure law and human rights: Commemorative for Stefan Trechsel] (pp. 765780). Zürich: Schulthess Juristische Medien AG.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C.(2011). Should criminal juries give reasons for their verdicts? Chicago-Kent Law Review, 86 , 613668.Google Scholar
Transparency International. (2007). Global corruption report: Corruption in judicial systems. Scholar
Transparency International Georgia. (2010). Refreshing Georgia’s courts. Trial by jury: More democracy or a face-lift for the judiciary? by Jury.pdfGoogle Scholar
Vidmar, N. (2000). The jury elsewhere in the world. In Vidmar, N (Ed.), World jury systems (pp. 421447). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vidmar, N.(2003). Juries and lay assessors in the Commonwealth: A contemporary survey. Criminal Law Forum, 13, 385407.Google Scholar
Vogler, R. (2006, July 6–9). Lay participation and the criminal justice revolutions in Eastern Europe: The cases of Georgia and Ukraine [Paper presentation]. Law and Society Association Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD. On file with authors.Google Scholar
Vogler, R.(2009). Report on the 2009 Draft of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia prepared on behalf of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Wheatley, J. (2017) Georgia from national awakening to Rose Revolution: Delayed transition in the Former Soviet Union. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
World Bank. (1998, April 10). Georgia judicial assessment (Report No. 17356-GE). Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats