This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk brief was produced in response to a query from one of Transparency International’s national chapters. The Anti-Corruption Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International and funded by the European Union.
Query
Can jury trials act as a safeguard against corruption in the judiciary? What international standards, laws, conventions, and/or principles recommend or require trial by juries, and in what context? Is there data on which countries do/do not have trial by juries?
This Helpdesk Answer examines the role of jury trials, reviewing the relevant international standards, comparative practice, and available evidence on whether it can help reduce the risk of judicial corruption. No international legal instrument requires trial by jury, leaving States free to decide how cases are adjudicated if fair trial guarantees are respected. Existing research does not indicate that juries perform better or worse than professional judges in corruption cases. Instead, factors such as case selection, evidence and trial management appear to have a greater influence on outcomes. Jury trials may make it harder to influence the outcome of a case by spreading decision-making across ordinary citizens rather than a single judge. However, they are not a solution to judicial corruption on their own. Their effectiveness depends on wider safeguards, including independent investigations, fair prosecutions and strong judicial institutions.
Authors
Maria Leonor Rodríguez Pratt
Reviewers
Jamie Bergin & Maria Constanza Castro
Date
19/08/2026
