The Jury Is Still Out on the Future of Jury Trials in Russia by rraul

VIEWS: 61 PAGES: 7

									The Jury Is Still Out on the Future of Jury Trials in Russia
Irina Dline and Olga Schwartz



E
        ight years have passed since the 1993 Russian           mediocre), the number of acquittals was less than 0.5
        Constitution reintroduced the jury-trial                percent (Boris Zolotumhin, “Sudebnaya Reforma i
        system, perceived by many as a cornerstone of           Voprosy Borbi s Prestupnostyu,” website of the Public
Russian legal reform. Over these years, the new                 Informational Center, at www.ndm.msk.ru/library).
system has had to overcome—and has yet to over-                       The jury-trial system was reintroduced in the
come—significant obstacles and controversies. This              course of the 1992–93 judicial reforms. The purpose
article looks into the current dynamics and trends in           was to free the justice system from political control,
the development of this institution, with a focus on            promote the adversarial process, rid the courts of their
various issues and problems faced by the jury-trial             strong proprosecution leaning (typical of the Soviet
system, the factors causing these problems, and                 neoinquisitorial system), and bridge the gap between
possible ways to resolve them.                                  citizens and legal institutions. Brought to life by the
                                                                1993 Constitution, the foundations of the jury-trial
A brief historical background and the                           system were laid out in the Law on Jury Trial System,
dynamics of the jury-trial initiative                           the Criminal Code, and other laws and regulations.
Contrary to the common misperception that the jury-                   However, the expense and complexity of the new
trial system is a Western invention transplanted into           system forced reformers to seek compromises limiting
postcommunist Russia by pro-Western reformers and               its jurisdiction to regional and territorial courts and
their US advisers, this institution has deep roots in           covering only the most severe crimes (such as murder,
Russian history. First established during the 1864 legal        rape, theft of significant assets, and crimes against state
reforms, it was a highly developed and respected                security). Furthermore, it was decided that the system
feature of Russian society.                                     should first be introduced, as a pilot project, in only
       Ironically, Lenin’s Bolshevik comrades demanded          nine regions: the Saratov, Ryazan, Ivanovo, Ulyanovsk,
jury trials each time they found themselves in jail but         and Rostov oblasts; the Moscow Region; and
hurried to do away with the system, along with other            Stavropol Krai, Altai Krai, and Krasnodar Krai.
liberal legal institutions, after the 1917 revolution. Under          The first jury trial took place in Saratov in
the Soviet system, cases were decided either by profes-         December 1993. The Martynov brothers were tried
sional judges or by a judge and two lay assessors. Lay          for the first-degree murder of three people and could
assessors were supposed to decide not only on the facts         have faced the death penalty. In the course of the trial,
but (unlike jurors) also on the legal issues in the case, for   however, it was established that the brothers were
which they had no training. All they could do was nod           guilty only of exceeding the limits of self-defense. The
to the judge; the public came to refer to them as               legal community unanimously agreed that if there had
“nodders.” The judges, in turn, nodded to procurators,          been a bench trial, rather than a jury trial, both
largely ignoring the defense. Despite the low quality of        brothers would have been found guilty of the murder
police and investigative work (a late-1980s survey              charges. The more adversarial process had changed the
showed that 81.8 percent of judges thought it poor or           standards of proof.


104                                                                                 EAST EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
       Expectations for the new system’s development         pending in the Duma for several years. The new code
were great. Says Sergei Vitsin, deputy chair of the          was finally adopted on November 22, 2001, was
Council for the Improvement of the System of Justice:        approved by the Federation Council on December 5,
“When we developed the concept of judicial reform            and will come into force on July 1, 2002 (with the
in Russia, in which the jury-trial system had an             exception of some provisions that require more time
important place, we believed that all the conditions         to implement.) The code provides for countrywide
were ripe for this institution to acquire at least the       jury trials for a number of the most serious crimes
same significance as it had in prerevolutionary Russia”      (Rossiiskaya Gazeta, Criminal Procedure Code of the
(Sud Prisyazhnykh: Pyat Let Raboty [Materials of the         Russian Federation, sect. 2, art. 31, “Jurisdiction of
roundtable conference], Publication of the Center for        Criminal Cases,” December 22, 2001). The jury-trial
the Support of Criminal Justice Reform, September            system is planned to be expanded throughout Russia
17, 1999 [Krasnodar, 1999], p. 54; referred to hereafter     after January 1, 2003.
as Sud Prisyazhnykh).                                              However, even a major legislative victory, such as
       Due to a number of factors, however, as noted         the passage of the new Criminal Procedure Code, does
below, the introduction of the new system did not go         not by itself automatically resolve all the problems that
as smoothly as the reformers had hoped. In the fall of       have crippled the development of the jury-trial system
1995, the Duma considered a bill expanding the jury-         for so many years. The law provides an opportunity for
trial system to another 12 political subdivisions. But       the system to succeed; realizing this opportunity may
the government was against this expansion, citing the        require significant regulatory, policy, and political efforts.
lack of money. Thus, although about 20 political
subdivisions supported the introduction of the jury-         Issues and problems—the factors causing them
trial system, it has not been expanded beyond the            and proposed solutions
initial nine regions. Moreover, even in these nine           The most important problems facing the jury-trial
regions, the system is struggling to maintain itself,        system are budgetary constraints; legal procedures that
undermined by both financial problems and political          are not designed to promote the financial efficiency of
opposition from the regional administrators and law          the system; technical and administrative problems;
enforcement agencies. On December 2, 1998, the               political controversies over the high acquittal rates in
governor of the Ryazan Oblast issued a statement             jury trials; and, finally, the legacy of the Soviet
addressed to the chairmen of the Russian Supreme             mentality in Russian legal institutions.
Court and the Ryazan Regional Court, arguing that
jury trials should be discontinued in the region. He         Financial issues
wrote, “Jury trials have not met with expectations,          On the surface, the greatest obstacle to the develop-
since they produced a large number of acquittals that        ment of the jury-trial system is the lack of money in
invoked a strong negative response among the popula-         the country’s meager budget. Some experts suggest
tion of the region” (“Finansovaya Petlya Dlya Suda           that, at least partially, the financial problem can be
Prisyazhnyh,” Rossiiskaya Yustitsiya, no. 5, C [1999],       attributed to the unfocused and inconsistent allocation
pp. 5–7). A similar position was expressed by the Altai      of funds available for judicial reform. As Marina
administration. Even some judges and lawyers who are         Nemytina, a legal scholar and director of Project for
directly involved in jury trials state that the country is   the Support of Legal Reform in Saratov, pointed out
not ready for the jury system.                               to us, Russia is now introducing the institution of
       The recent months, however, have brought a            justices of the peace and is contemplating an introduc-
new hope for the system. President Vladimir Putin            tion of administrative courts. “I suspect,” she says,
has made judicial reform one of the top priorities of        “that this will require significantly greater financial
his government, and serious efforts have been made           investment than the countrywide expansion of the
toward the completion and passage into law of the            jury system. The key problem with Russian legal
new Criminal Procedure Code that had been                    reform, as I see it, is that before completing the imple-


WINTER/SPRING   2002                                                                                                   105
mentation of one institution or type of justice, we             number keeps increasing. Even for a prosperous country
launch the next one. As a result, the justice system            such as the United States, trying half of all cases by jury
becomes unbalanced.”                                            would be a great burden. The Russian legal community
       Even apart from this issue, however, the jury-trial      came to realize the need for a procedure that would
system is expensive. In 1997, the Judicial Department           reduce the number of jury trials.
made a rough calculation of the budgetary needs to
support the implementation of the jury-trial system             Controversies over the plea-bargaining system
throughout Russia. According to their estimate, the             and proposed solutions
technical support, construction, and renovation of              From the beginning of the Russian legal reforms,
courtrooms would require as much as $1,496,124,000              experts such as Judge Alexander Shturnev, a member
(quoted in dollars, based on the 1997 average exchange          of the Presidium of the Council of Judges, actively
rate of $1 = 5 rubles). (This information comes from            promoted the plea-bargaining procedure as a way to
the letter of Judicial Department Director General V.           increase the efficiency of the court system. Such
Chernyavsky to the Duma Committee for Legislation               proposals were met with objections from both conser-
and Judicial Reform, document no. 167, of April 22,             vative and liberal positions. The criticism from the
1998.) In addition, there will be an annual expenditure         liberal position was most clearly articulated by Valery
involving jury fees. The daily fee of a juror in Russia is      Savitsky, one of the founding fathers of Russian legal
equal to one half of the average daily pay of a trial judge.    reform. Savitsky despised the fact that the procedure
       A part of the amount needed for the country-             was based on self-incrimination by an accused person.
wide implementation of the system represents                    He considered it unacceptable for a country such as
nonrecurrent costs for onetime adjustments and is               Russia, where memories of gulags are still alive and
unrelated to the proportion of cases tried by jury. It          coerced self-incrimination is common.
includes furnishing courtrooms for jury trials,                       On the other side, more-conservative members
designing computer databases, and training judges,              of the legal community have interpreted plea
lawyers, and support personnel. The second, and                 bargaining as a way of making deals with criminals and
larger part, of this sum consists of expenses that grow         thus as damaging to public morale. In their view, plea
proportionally to the ratio of cases tried by jury:             bargaining violates the victims’ rights, as a victim has
jurors’ fees, the costs of hiring additional judges and         no role in a plea agreement. This concern originates
support personnel to handle the added workload, and             from the Soviet legal tradition in which a victim is a
the costs of constructing additional court facilities.          separate party to a trial with the right to ask questions
While the nonrecurrent costs are a constant figure that         of witnesses and to make statements (which victims
cannot be modified, the costs dependent on the ratio            occasionally use to slip in inadmissible evidence).
of cases tried by jury (as opposed to those tried under               The necessity of finding a procedure to reduce
the old system) can be substantially influenced by              the number of jury trials, on the one hand, and the
modification of laws and policies.                              controversy over plea bargaining, on the other,
       In the United States, only 5 percent of criminal         presented a difficult dilemma. The debate on the
cases are tried by jury; the remaining 95 percent are effi-     subject resulted in a compromise reflected in the prior
ciently disposed of through the plea-bargaining system.         version of the new Criminal Procedure Code, which
Under current Russian law, there is no plea-bargaining          passed the second reading in the State Duma this June.
process or equivalent. Thus, a defendant has no incen-          (The draft code was last published in the Yuridichesky
tive to choose a traditional bench trial, where a chance        Vestnik newspaper in 1994, long before the latest
of acquittal would be less than 0.5 percent. Indeed, the        provisions were proposed. Since then, the draft has
statistics show a steady growth in the ratio of eligible        been only circulated for internal use.) The draft code
cases that go to jury trials. In the nine jury-trial regions,   provided for a “reduced procedure for the examina-
the ratio of cases tried by jury was 30.9 percent in 1995,      tion of evidence in court,” with the trial conducted by
37.3 percent in 1996, 43.2 percent in 1997, and this            a professional judge and limited only to the examina-



106                                                                                 EAST EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
tion of evidence agreed upon by the prosecution and           relief. On the negative side, the scope of the Russian
defense. (This procedure is already used in proceedings       legal system’s democratization, under this reduced
for justices of peace, in accordance with the Law on          procedure, would be seriously limited. It would be an
Amendments to Criminal Procedure Code and Civil               extreme solution imposed by financial constraints.
Procedure Code in Connection with the Introduction                   Yet another proposal was extended by Judge
of the Institution of Justices of Peace, adopted in the       Elena Snegiryova, one of the pioneers of the jury-trial
summer of 2000.) The procedure applied only to                initiative in Russia. In her opinion, access to a jury
crimes carrying up to five years of imprisonment. This        trial should be limited to defendants who plead not
procedure presented a limited version of plea                 guilty. (Currently, in Russia, even those defendants
bargaining, although it is not directly contingent on a       who plead guilty have the option of trial by jury, since
defendant’s guilty plea.                                      the jury has the discretion to grant leniency or
      The “reduced procedure” received the strong             “special” leniency, which obligates the judge to miti-
support of judges and lawyers. In many cases, it would        gate a sentence; see the transcript of the Duma
save the courts the wasted time and money of dealing          Legislative Committee Conference on the draft
with dozens of witnesses, whose failure to appear in          Criminal Procedure Code, Istra, September 6–7, 2000,
court is a common problem. However, defendants are            p. 59.) Again, such a limitation would significantly
given no direct incentive to give up their right to a         reduce both expense and judicial workload but would
jury trial and accept the “reduced procedure.” By             increase the danger of coerced guilty pleas. The new
waiving the guilty-plea requirement, the procedure            Criminal Procedure Code retains the right to a jury-
lost its driving force: the guarantee of reduced              trial for those who plead not guilty.
sentences. With the growing realization that the
“reduced procedure” has limited efficiency, more and          Controversy over the high acquittal rates
more experts have expressed their willingness to accept       While budgetary constraints are most frequently cited
plea bargaining in its full scope. Following the recom-       as the main obstacle for the jury-trial system, such an
mendations of the legal community, the Duma                   explanation leaves out important arguments involving
Legislative Committee included in the Criminal                core legal and social values. The average acquittal rate
Procedure Code a chapter on plea bargaining.                  of about 20 percent, produced by the jury-trial system,
However, its applies only to criminal offenses carrying       as compared to approximately 0.5 percent produced by
up to five years of imprisonment, and therefore will          traditional trials, has come as quite a shock.
not be offered as an alternative to a jury trial. Also, the         Acquittals provoked an outcry from proprosecu-
issue of coerced self-incrimination continues to be a         tion judges, from procurators reprimanded by their
concern. The drafters initially imposed a requirement         supervisors for losing cases, and from investigators
on judges to ensure that the guilty plea was not              whose mistakes proved so costly. The press has been
coerced. This requirement upset the procuracy, which          flooded with publications scaring the public with
saw it as prejudicial toward law enforcement officers.        images of serial murderers and rapists being released by
The drafters made a political concession and took the         jurors back onto the streets.
requirement out.                                                    As noted by Ludmila Karnozova, the leading
                                                              researcher of the Institute of State and Law of the
Other proposed measures to reduce expenses                    Russian Academy of Sciences, such publications
and judicial workload                                         reflected not so much public opinion as the views of
There have been other proposed measures to keep the           those editing them. “I am convinced,” she wrote,
number of jury trials down. Supreme Court justices            “that the obstacles for the normal functioning of the
Vladimir Demidov and Stanislav Razumov proposed               jury-trial system, which introduced acquittals into
reducing the purview of jury trials to crimes entailing       our legal practice for the first time in decades, are
the death penalty or life imprisonment. On the positive       based on the rejection by our legal community of
side, such a measure would provide drastic financial          the mere thought that an acquittal is a legitimate


WINTER/SPRING   2002                                                                                              107
outcome of court proceedings. On the surface, the              tive, Judge Evgeny Druzin of Saratov Regional Court
obstacles are mostly technical, but there is an under-         (where the first jury trial in postcommunist Russia took
lying reason that makes them look like complex                 place), commented to us, the experience of the Saratov
problems” (Sud Prisyazhnykh, p. 2).                            Regional Court demonstrates that the vast majority of
       The high acquittal rates were mostly due to inves-      jury verdicts are fair, based on the volume of the
tigators’ and procurators’ inability to meet the quality       evidence presented to the jurors. “It is amazing some-
standards imposed on them by the jury system. The              times,” he says, “how wise a decision jurors can make in
legal provision that requires mandatory exclusion of           a very complicated situation.” As for the publications
inadmissible evidence in any trial is, in reality, practiced   denouncing jurors for acquittals of defendants whose
only in jury trials. In traditional trials, judges routinely   guilt was clear, Judge Druzin pointed out that such
overlook “minor” procedural violations and such                reports were usually based on one-sided information,
supposedly insignificant formalities as missing signatures     ignoring defense evidence.
and dates. In jury trials, inadmissible evidence is merci-            As for upgrading the quality of police and inves-
lessly excluded, ruining a prosecution’s case.                 tigative work, progress is already underway. Many
       Furthermore, the traditional Soviet judicial system     experts admit that the amount of excluded evidence in
formerly overrelied on self-incriminating statements,          jury-trial regions diminishes as investigators adjust to
many of which were coerced. In a jury trial, defendants        the new standards. Nevertheless, law enforcement
can waive their self-incriminations. Even though direct        agencies resist the development of the system.
mentioning of police coercion by a defendant or his                   “Why has the jury-trial system not been
attorney in front of jurors is prohibited (it is considered    expanded?” asks Alexander Shurygin, chairman of the
inadmissible and serves as grounds for reversal by the         Supreme Court Cassation Chamber; “Well, there are
Supreme Court), jurors put greater weight on corrobo-          many factors. For instance, some governors oppose it.
rating evidence and give acquittals if it is insufficient.     And their opinion is influenced by the leadership of the
(Under Russian law, acquittals can be appealed to the          law enforcement agencies, departments of interior, and
Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court on the                  regional procuracies. What is the task here? To improve
grounds of procedural violations during the trial. A           the professional skills and knowledge of the law enforce-
significant percentage of acquittals are reversed. For         ment officers; that is all” (Sud Prisyazhnykh, p. 7).
example, in 1998 the Supreme Court reversed 36.9                      The alienation of the legal authorities from the
percent of acquittals produced by jury trials.) If we also     common people is not only unproductive; it backfires.
add procuratorial unpreparedness to the adversarial            The distrust of the authorities, police, procuracy, and
process and the lack of training in public speaking, the       courts, imprinted in the minds of the Russian people
number of acquittals grows even greater.                       during the last 80 years, manifests itself in the jurors’
       While grudgingly accepting some share of                reflexive, half-conscious confrontation with procura-
responsibility for acquittals, many in the legal commu-        tors and in their tendency to assume coercion of the
nity put the main blame on jurors. They complain that          defendants. Some acquittals are indeed examples of
common people are incapable of understanding                   jury nullification and have their origins in the old
complex issues, and that educated prospective jurors           animosity between the people and the authorities.
routinely evade jury duty, thus leaving the courts with               At a conference in Krasnodar, trial judge
senile retirees and ignorant unemployed drunks who are         Vladimir Lazovsky described such a case. The jury
incompetent and tend to identify with defendants as            acquitted a defendant who threw a grenade at a police
“their own kind.” They claim that the system itself is         station in front of several witnesses. The case was
good, but that the people are not ready for it. Such a         reversed, but the new jury again acquitted him. “Jurors
position is perhaps questionable, considering that 140         acquitted him, because we are strangers for them,”
years ago the Russian people successfully performed            admitted Judge Lazovsky; “people do not like courts,
their jury duty; moreover, not all the judges share this       do not like the police, do not like the procuracy” (Sud
outlook. As one of the pioneers of the jury-trial initia-      Prisyazhnykh, p. 46).



108                                                                                EAST EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW
       The issue of acquittals has exposed the conflict      answer dozens, occasionally hundreds, of questions,
between the old mentality of the Russian legal author-       concerning the proof of each episode, a defendant’s
ities and the requirements of the new democratic legal       guilt, recommended leniency, and so on, which are
institutions. “I think that until the lawyers learn to       often hard to comprehend. As a result, the verdicts are
perform professionally and adequately in jury trials,        often confusing and contain internal contradictions,
the blame will be always on jurors,” comments Sergei         particularly in complex cases with multiple defendants
Pashin, one of the principle authors of the Russian          and episodes. Currently, experts are working on
legal reform, “and until we, educated people, perceive       proposals to improve and simplify the questionnaire
ourselves as an integral part of our population, they        forms, to assist judges and jurors.
will consider us strangers and acquit those who throw
grenades at us” (Sud Prisyazhnykh, p. 46).                   The current state of affairs and future
       In the recent months, more than ever before,          expectations
President Putin and his government have made signif-         The peculiarity of the current situation, as a whole, lies
icant progress in overcoming political resistance to         in the coexistence and mutual influence of two entirely
judicial reform, including the expansion of the jury-        different systems of justice, old and new. The jury-trial
trial system, by the law enforcement agencies and their      system as an element of judicial reform is having a
supporters in the State Duma. The use of the presi-          significant influence on the traditional system of justice.
dent’s political weight and influence to ensure              As the judges from the nine jury-trial regions observe,
parliamentary support for the new Criminal                   the amount of excluded evidence is steadily diminishing
Procedure Code and the procuracy’s compliance was            as the investigators learn to do their job properly, in
crucial for its passage. Still more political will will be   accordance with procedures. The culture of the adver-
needed to ensure its implementation.                         sarial process is spreading and penetrating into
                                                             traditional trials. Those judges presiding over trials by
Technical problems                                           jury are applying the same quality standards in tradi-
The picture of the difficulties facing the courts            tional trials, while the rest of the judges retain their old
employing the jury-trial system would be incomplete          mentality and a lax attitude towards procedures.
without mention of various organizational and tech-                 As noted by Judge Vladimir Lazovsky, “Two
nical problems. One of the difficulties is related to        types of proceedings, the regular one and the one with
forming a jury panel. Electoral lists, from which the        jurors, exist in parallel, but at the same time there is a
names of potential jurors are drawn, are poorly main-        diffusion, as positive practices are spreading from jury
tained and contain many “dead souls,” people who have        trials to regular trials” (Sud Prisyazhnykh, p. 27).
died or moved away. Also, there are no real enforcement             The danger is that the influence goes both
powers to ensure that prospective jurors appear in court.    ways. As the jury-trial system is still a limited aspect
As a result, jury selection becomes difficult, since there   of judicial reform, implanted into a larger traditional
are few people to select from. Even more challenging is      system, it experiences pressures from the larger
the task of retaining a jury panel. Due to the lack of       system. These pressures are embodied in the political
enforcement powers, witness no-show is common, so            controversies and problems already described. Even
trials with multiple witnesses can drag on for unreason-     with its passage into law, the new Criminal
ably long periods of time, and thus jurors lose patience.    Procedure Code in its current form does not entirely
Such technical problems increase expenditures and judi-      eliminate this duality of the justice system, as the
cial workload. By overlooking them, the reformers            jurisdiction of the jury-trial system will be limited
burdened judges with administrative issues that would        only to the most serious offenses. The remaining
normally be outside of their concern.                        crimes will continue to be tried in the traditional
       Finally, the Russian verdict is designed as a very    manner. It remains to be seen whether the new insti-
complex questionnaire that goes far beyond a simple          tution has enough staying power to reform the
choice of “guilty” or “not guilty.” Jurors have to           whole system from within.


WINTER/SPRING   2002                                                                                                 109
       As the legal scholar Marina Nemytina noted, “In         tions in certain regions has been, to some extent,
the unstable economic, political, and social situation,        holding up the system’s development but cannot deter-
jury trial became not only a legal but also a political        mine its future,” Judge Druzin said, “since the jury-trial
institution. Under normal conditions this should not be        system is guaranteed by the Constitution, and it will be
the case. Assessing the situation with the jury-trial          introduced in Russia. This is determined by the posi-
system, eight years after its introduction, I conclude that    tion of the Supreme Court and the President of the
the key error was in the inconsistency of the Russian          Russian Federation.”
judicial reform and the lack of coordination between its              And indeed, the Constitution would be nearly
elements. Starting the change, one must thoroughly             impossible to change. Russia’s membership in the
calculate and substantiate all necessary conditions. Once      Council of Europe is another strong rationale for
the change has started, it must be continued, otherwise        doing whatever it takes to make the system work. By
both the institution and people involved in its imple-         joining the Council of Europe in 1996, Russia under-
mentation risk being rejected by the system.”                  took a number of obligations in the areas of state rule
       Currently, the government firmly intends to             and human rights, among them adoption of a code of
follow through with the jury-trial initiative. For the         criminal procedure compatible with European stan-
first time in the last decade it also seems to have suffi-     dards and the implementation of these laws across the
cient power to do so. The jury-trial system is planned         country’s entire territory. Compliance with these
to be expanded throughout Russia after January 1,              commitments is being monitored by the Committee
2003. There will still be the challenge of ensuring the        on the Honoring of Obligations and Commitments by
funds for both the initial introduction of the system          Member States of the Council of Europe. The adop-
and its continuous maintenance.                                tion of the new Criminal Procedure Code greatly
       Most judges, especially the ones involved in the        enhances the prospects of the advancement of Russian
jury system, look forward to its expansion. Judge              judicial reform, which includes the jury-trial system.
Druzin of Saratov Regional Court confirmed that                While its establishment is a difficult task, it would be
colleagues in his region involved in jury trials, the vast     still harder to turn back.
majority of defense attorneys, and the progressive part
of the procuracy all support the jury system and believe
                                                               Irina Dline worked for the US Department of Justice’s Office for
its expansion will foster the further democratization of       Prosecutorial Assistance and Training and the American Bar
society, thereby guaranteeing the constitutional rights of     Association’s Central and Eastern European Law Initiative in
the citizens and fully protecting their rights and interests   Moscow from 1993 to 1999. Olga Schwartz is currently project
in the sphere of criminal justice.                             coordinator for the Russian Foundation for Judicial Reform.
       Both Judge Druzin and Justice Razumov, along            Previously, she was a consultant for the criminal division of the
                                                               Supreme Court of the USSR, a chief specialist for the Department
with other the experts we contacted, believe that the
                                                               of Legislation and Judicial Reform of the Russian Ministry of
problems for the jury-trial system today are solely finan-     Justice, and a counselor for the Duma Committee on Legislation
cial, and the system should and will be expanded. “The         and Judicial Reform. She has authored a number of publications on
position of the procuracy and the heads of administra-         the judicial system and criminal procedure.




110                                                                                   EAST EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW

								
To top