Prospects For Criminal Jury Justice İn Azerbaijan: Comparative Study
Azerbaycan Ceza Yargılamasında Jüri Sistemine İlişkin Beklentiler: Karşılaştırmalı Araştırma
Nazım Ziyadov
The Republic of Azerbaijan is one of the newly independent states that have introduced jury trials in criminal justice legislation. However, so far, unlike its neighbor – the Russian Federation that shares a common Soviet background – Azerbaijan has not yet implemented such trials in practice. The influence of Russian law-making model in most aspects of the Azerbaijani law, including legislation regulating criminal justice administration, is still evident. This article analyzes the effects of jury trials over criminal justice system of Russia. Based on findings relevant to the acquittal rates in the Russian criminal justice, the article will suggest possible pathways of jury trial development and its effects on similar criminal justice system of Azerbaijan.
In sum, the article has two main objectives: (i) to identify through comparative analysis generalizable findings on the role that jury trials come to play in national criminal justice systems and how the overall system where such proceedings exist is affected; (ii) to draw lessons from the Russian experience and outline perspectives on the application of jury trials in the Republic of Azerbaijan based on comparative analysis of the criminal justice systems of Russia and Azerbaijan.
Criminal Justice System, Jury, Russia, Azerbaijan.
Azerbaycan Cumhuriyeti, ceza hukuku mevzuatına jüri yargılama usulünü dâhil eden, yakın zamanda bağımsızlığını kazanan ülkelerden birisidir. Bununla birlikte, şimdiye kadar, komşusunun – ortak bir Sovyet geçmişini paylaşan Rusya Federasyonu’nun – aksine, Azerbaycan bu tür yargılama usulünü uygulamada henüz kullanmamıştır. Ceza adaleti sistemini düzenleyen mevzuat da dâhil olmak üzere, Azerbaycan hukukunun birçok alanında Rus kanun yapma tekniğinin etkisi hala belirgin biçimde görünmektedir. Bu makalede, jüri yargılama usulünün Rusya’nın ceza adaleti sistemindeki etkilerini inceleyeceğiz. Rus ceza yargılaması sistemindeki beraat oranlarına ilişkin verilere dayanarak, jüri yargılamasının gelişmesine ve bunun Azerbaycan ceza yargılaması üzerindeki etkilerine ilişkin muhtemel rotalar çizeceğiz.
Kısaca, bu makalenin iki temel amacı var: (i) Jüri yargılama usulünün ulusal ceza yargılaması sisteminde gündeme gelmesine ve bu usulün mevcut olduğu sistemlerin nasıl etkilendiğine ilişkin karşılaştırmalı araştırma tekniği kullanılarak genelleştirilebilecek bulguları tespit etmek; (ii) Rus tecrübesinden ders almak ve Rusya ve Azerbaycan ceza yargılaması sistemlerinin karşılaştırılarak incelenmesine dayanarak Azerbaycan Cumhuriyeti’nde jüri yargılaması usulünün uygulanmasına ilişkin perspektifleri ana hatlarıyla belirlemek.
Ceza Yargılaması, Jüri, Rusya, Azerbaycan.
INTRODUCTION
There is a long list of arguments for and against of jury trials that have at numerous times been brought by opponents and proponents of such trials. For the purposes of this article, we will use one important element of criminal justice proceedings – acquittals, to defend application of jury trials in the new democracies. Acquittal figures in criminal proceedings in general, and jury trials in particular may assist us to overview the overall leniency of criminal justice system. In this article, we will not touch an issue of 'perverse' jury verdicts leading to acquittals. Instead, our focus of attention will be an evaluation of general acquittal picture of criminal justice systems in two countries – the Russian Federation and Azerbaijan, selected for purposes of the focused comparison methodology.
This article suggests that acquittals delivered by juries play a key role in shaping attitudes in favor or against of this mode of trial. We believe and will further hypothesize that a jury acquittal is not only one of the factors stimulating the development of jury trials in a country where this mode of trial already exists, but also a reason that may play an important role in the evolution of fairer criminal justice system in a country with a weak judiciary that intends to apply this mode of trial. Generally, jury acquittals may lead to the introduction of different reform packages. In practice, acquittals delivered by juries may give rise to governments1 imposing limitations on this mode of trials.
As a rule, the result of jury decision-making is either a conviction or an acquittal. Contrary to lay assessors, who play a nominal role in the delivery of final judgments in the courts, professional judges are obliged to follow verdicts of juries, unless there are significant grounds to act otherwise. This factor alone may influence the criminal justice system of a country where jury trials are practiced. However, only a tiny minority of criminal cases in Russia are actually heard by juries. According to the current doctrine of jury trials, juries should hear the most important and serious cases. Although the scope of cases heard by juries in the overall criminal justice system in countries where they are practiced is limited, such cases represent the most serious ones. Therefore, final decisions and the process leading to their delivery may strongly influence the overall administration of justice in any given country.
