Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s focus on the costs of the courts and speeding up the processes is commendable as far as it goes. That effort, however, should not be at the expense of justice, victims of crime or public involvement with the courts.
The court backlog is huge, and it was large even before the Covid-19 lockdowns. From June 2018 to June last year, according to the Ministry of Justice, the number of active jury trial cases increased from 2000 cases to 3400.
This is far too many. Justice delayed is, as is said, often justice denied. Defendants can be left hanging, their lives upturned, sometimes for years, whether guilty or not. Some will be in custody or on remand with restrictions.
Victims are left in the lurch without "closure". Witness memories will fade and become less reliable.
Clogged courts are damaging on many levels.
Mr Goldsmith has been considering raising the bar for the right to a jury trial, which is based on applicable maximum jail penalties.
These rose from three months to two years in 2013. Mr Goldsmith is considering whether the cut-off should be three, five or seven years.
Most offenders receive much less than the maximum. They are often released from jail early.
Submissions on the proposals closed last Thursday.
The two-year threshold is towards the upper end compared to other common law nations.
Defendants undoubtedly try to game the system at times. Some who are guilty may feel that experienced judges are more likely to see through their defence, while others may seek delays to avoid facing justice or prolong the ordeal for their victims.
However, most family violence or sexual charges carry potentially lengthy maximum prison terms anyway.
Extending the jury trial threshold to three years might not capture many more charges, making little difference in practice.
Jury trials are an important means for the wider public to engage with the justice system. Members of the public experience the courts firsthand and participate in the administration of crime and punishment, a pivotal part of society.
Crucially, jurors bring not only their varied life experiences and community values but also fresh perspectives. Judges, through long careers as lawyers and on the bench, may become jaded and cynical after seeing so much so similar. Jurors’ fresh eyes offer a counterbalance to this risk.
When jurors deliver verdicts on high-profile cases, the public is more likely to accept the decision, seeing it as made by people like themselves rather than by judges alone.
While Covid-19 can be blamed for a large part of the delay, particularly in Auckland which has a second extended lockdown and where half the backlog is situated, ways must be found to make the court system more efficient.
Suggestions include streamlining processes, longer court hours, increased resources, better case management and further digitisation.
The court backlog needs to be pared back permanently, but denying defendants the ancient right of trial by jury when facing potentially lengthy prison sentences should not be the solution.
That right is too precious.
Grit and purpose
It surely could not happen. But it did — again, and again, and again.
India is the hardest place for visiting teams to win cricket tests.
A modest Black Caps team with a poor recent record went into those foreign conditions to do battle with a team laced with multimillionaire stars. New Zealand travelled without its premier player.
Somehow, the New Zealanders shocked by winning the first test. Astonishingly, they claimed victory in the second in spin-friendly conditions crafted for India. The impossible series win was astounding.
Unbelievably, they went on to win the third test on Sunday, even without their hero from test two. No other team in history has clean-swept India in a three, four or five-match series.
Every time Indian players looked like taking charge, the Black Caps hung in, battling away.
The team demonstrated the power of grit, purpose, passion and playing for each other.
