I. Zarembo / RIA Novosti

The Supreme Court has submitted its proposals to the Human Rights Council (HRC) under the President to expand the jurisdiction of the jury, a member of the HRC and retired judge of the Constitutional Court Tamara Morshchakova told Vedomosti. The issue is about modifying the jury trial based on the model of the institution of people's assessors, which previously existed in the USSR and Russia, Morshchakova knows. This is entirely justified for some categories of cases, but it will not replace a real jury trial, she believes.

In January, President Vladimir Putin instructed the Supreme Court to develop proposals on the possibility of expanding the use of jury trials by March 30. The need to return to their jurisdiction the types of crimes that were previously excluded under various pretexts (currently, such courts only consider cases of crimes that carry a life sentence or the death penalty – this is about 500 cases per year) has been stated many times by members of the Human Rights Council.

The Supreme Court's proposals are a voluminous document offering various models of citizen participation in legal proceedings: both the preservation of the existing jury (within its current jurisdiction), and its work in a reduced composition, and the introduction of the institute of assessors, said the chairman of the Human Rights Council Mikhail Fedotov. Of fundamental importance, according to him, is the opportunity to find new forms of citizen participation in the administration of justice. The Human Rights Council intends to discuss these proposals this week at a meeting of the standing commission on civil participation in legal reform.

Earlier, Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court Vladimir Davydov said that there is a proposal to reduce jury panels to seven people, and panels of five jurors could consider cases in district courts, where 98% of all criminal cases are heard. Then, cases of murder, robbery and serious bodily harm resulting in death could be transferred to the jurisdiction of the jury. In addition, judges, the Supreme Court believes, should take part in the process of discussing the verdict in the deliberation room - this would prevent numerous errors that subsequently become grounds for the cancellation of decisions.

The institution of people's assessors arose in the USSR in 1960. They enjoyed equal rights with the presiding judge in the court session. In 2000, the institution was reformed: lists of assessors began to be compiled by random sampling, the term of office of "people's judges" included in such a list was five years. But in 2003, people's assessors were removed from hearing civil cases, and in 2004 - criminal cases.

The Supreme Court has proposed to return the institution of people's assessors