1) The power of juries (with obvious reference to the power to nullify) 2) The “representativsness” of juries (or how we choose and evaluate the jury as a representation of “the community”) 3) How this forces us to think about the balance in law between “formalism” (formal equality and focus on inflexible “neutral” process) and substantive outcomes (or perhaps something closer to “substantive justice” for the individuals (and groups traditionally disadvantaged by law’s “equality”).

PLEASE REFER TO THE PAGES I WILL SEND YOU, IT WILL COVER ALL THE READINGS FOR THIS ASSGMENT. The photos will be attached in the additional materials field. Please make sure you mention the (Brooks and Doob) and (Kokopanace) parts from the readings.

What you need to do:
Drawing explicitly on the readings from Chapter 12 of the course text (though you can certainly refer to other materials from the course) answer the following question(s):
What role(s) should juries have in the Canadian justice system? Should we change how we choose juries and how we assure their “representativeness”? Should their powers be more limited, stay the same, or perhaps even be expanded, and why?
In your argument be sure to:
a) explain and discuss the traditional understanding of the jury’s role and function (including the possibility of “jury nullification”);
b) discuss the two views of “representativness” (highlighted in both Morton’s article, and also in the majority and minority decisions in R. v. Kokopenace) and specifically the strengths and weaknesses of those views (Note that Morton seems to arrive at similar conclusions as the dissenting Justices in Kokopenace); and
c) discuss how debates about the composition and power of the jury, reveal a seemingly intractable tension between the legal system’s commitment to formalism and “formal equality” for everyone, but also “substantive justice” for real individuals in specific instances and historical contexts. By what standard should we ultimately judge the outcomes produced by the legal system (how you answer this relates to whether you agree with the majority or minority judgement in Kokopenace)?
General note: While a question like “how we choose juries” may seem very technical, it speaks to larger questions about how different people are included and experience the justice system; and the importance of community norms of justice in informing legal decisions. It also challenges us to think about who has access to the justice system and what this access really means. These are not easy questions and therefore don’t have easy answers.