British Sign Language (BSL) users will be able to take part in jury service under new Government proposals unveiled today.
The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, set to be introduced to Parliament today, aims to amend the common law to allow BSL interpreters into the deliberation room.
A UK Government press release reads: “For the first time [we’re] enabling deaf people to sit on juries. Current laws ban the presence of a ‘stranger’ being in the jury deliberation room – this will be scrapped and instead allow a British Sign Language interpreter into the room.”
Amending the common law to permit British Sign Language (BSL) interpreters in the jury room during deliberations.
Find out more about the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill: https://t.co/0BFI7tHsb4
3/5 pic.twitter.com/KKEcEw2Qij
— Ministry of Justice (@MoJGovUK) March 9, 2021
The news is a win for Deaf campaigners, with several individuals previously rejected from jury service because of the so-called ‘13th juror’ rule.
In 1999, the then chief executive of the British Deaf Association (BDA), Jeff McWhinney, was refused permission to serve as a juror, with Judge Shirley Anywl QC saying that there was “no law which permits either me or any other judge of the crown court” to allow for a BSL interpreter in the deliberation room.
She also said that doing so would amount to an “incurable irregularity”.
The legal stance was also challenged in 2018 by David Buxton, chief executive of Action on Disability, who filed a judicial review on the issue.
Organisations have too called for change, with a report from the United Nations’ Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2017 calling for the UK Government to ensure all disabled people are “provided with adequate procedural accommodation within the justice system”.
“[They should] enable in particular deaf persons through the use of sign language interpreters, to fully and equally participate as jurors in court proceedings,” the document reads.
Meanwhile, a BDA spokeswoman told the Disability News Service in 2018 that the current practice “is an overt form of institutional discrimination and failure to accord Deaf people their rights as full citizens”.
“Justice should not only be received but also dispensed by all sections of the community including Deaf people,” they said.
The bill, if approved by Parliament, would apply to England and Wales only.
Photo: @MoJGovUK/Twitter.
By Liam O’Dell. Liam is a mildly deaf freelance journalist and campaigner from Bedfordshire. He wears bilateral hearing aids and can be found talking about disability, theatre, politics and more on Twitter and on his website.
Update: In a statement issued to The Limping Chicken, David Buxton said today’s news is “long, long overdue but very welcome”.
He said: “I am very pleased that the Ministry of Justice has finally recognised the need to update the law to allow BSL/English interpreters in the Jury Room in order that they may interpret for Deaf jurors who use sign language. This is indeed welcome news and comes after several years of lobbying ministers through a series of meetings in my previous role as Chief Executive of the British Deaf Association (BDA).
“The then Justice Minister met the BDA to discuss the outcome of the Working Group’s recommendations and its plans to review the legislation after the General Election 2015. However, these still hadn’t been implemented by the time I received a letter calling me for Jury service in 2017.”
This call for jury service is what led to the judicial review being filed, with the Ministry of Justice later asking for the opportunity to “look into the matter further” and examine “how the law should address this”.
Buxton continued: “Having agreed to that in 2018, I returned some nine months later to remind them of their obligations, to which they said they were still working on this matter. This was in 2019 and the delay was unacceptable to me so I contacted various key parliamentarians asking them to raise questions with the relevant Ministers whilst continuing to lobby the Minister.
“It’s now 2021, and finally, a new day dawns with this change to common law enabling Deaf sign language users to be part of the Justice System.
Buxton concluded by thanking his solicitor, Louise Whitfield; Professor Jemina Napier; Matthew Banks; Linda Richards and the Justice Secretary Robert Buckland QC MP.
Commenting on Twitter, Professor Napier said: “Amazing news. This is research impact! After a 10-year programme of research confirming that there are no barriers to deaf people serving as jurors when working with sign languages interpreters, we have now seen legislative change in Australia, Ireland & England!”
Buckland, who is also lord chancellor, added: “Disability should not be a barrier to people carrying out this most important civic duty.
“I am delighted we can open up jury service to many thousands more people and ensure our justice system becomes as accessible and inclusive as possible.”
The news was also welcomed by the Royal National Institute for Deaf people, with Advocacy Officer Annie Roberts saying in a statement: “Jury service is an obligation we all have as law abiding citizens, deaf people are citizens and therefore its only right that we should be able to play our part in society equal to everyone else. This is a small step forward for an inclusive society and valuing the contribution of the deaf community to our country.
Meanwhile Justin Tomlinson MP, the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work, said: “I am committed to making sure disabled people can participate fully in society and this announcement is a key step forward in achieving that ambition.”
Enjoying our eggs? Support The Limping Chicken:
The Limping Chicken is the world's most popular Deaf blog, and is edited by Deaf journalist, screenwriter and director Charlie Swinbourne.
Our posts represent the opinions of blog authors, they do not represent the site's views or those of the site's editor. Posting a blog does not imply agreement with a blog's content. Read our disclaimer here and read our privacy policy here.
Find out how to write for us by clicking here, and how to follow us by clicking here.
The site exists thanks to our supporters. Check them out below:
- BSL Zone: TV programmes in BSL for the Deaf community
- Deaf Umbrella: what support is available for deaf students?
- Bellman & Symfon: home alerting solutions, including the mobile phone transceiver!
- SignVideo: Instant BSL video interpreting online
- SignHealth: check out the BSL health library
- 999 BSL: call 999 in an emergency, in BSL
- Appa: Looking for RSLIs, TSLIs and CSWs, apply here!
- Signly: Adding BSL to websites
- Signworld: Learn BSL online!
- DCAL: world-class research into deafness, cognition and language
- Action Deafness: “A Deaf-Led Charity” – interpreting & community support services
- Sign Solutions: Instant access to Interpreters, training and BSL translation nationwide
- InterpretersLive: On demand BSL video interpretation
- Lipspeaker UK: specialist lipspeaking support
- BID: Deaf services, including advice and support, interpreting, employment and letters
- Performance Interpreting: BSL interpreting at concerts
- National Deaf Children's Society: The leading charity for deaf children
Fred Trull
March 9, 2021
This will be a victory for the sign-using sector. What about the 90% who do not sign?
sashadiestal
March 10, 2021
Exactly Fred and even so how would we cope with no notetaker? Some cases go on for weeks how would we remember everything with nothing written down. Furthermore how will a BSL user with little or no English remember all the important points of the cases they sit on?
bslterp
March 9, 2021
Hurrah! About time – it’s well overdue and I am glad that they are changing the rules.
However, as a very experienced court interpreter and trainer, I do have a couple of immediate concerns regarding interpreter provision.
1) Do they plan to use the same interpreters that interpreted the trial? I hope so because I think it would be extremely difficult to interpret jury deliberations without already having the shared knowledge that all the jurors have.
2) Who will guarantee that the quality of the interpreters is good enough? I see that it is possible that some non or lesser legally experienced interpreters will see this as a way into legal work but without the pressure of having to interpret in front of a judge, and without the stress of having to interpret legal terminology
I am sure that my other court interpreter colleagues will be able to add other considerations to the list.
I do hope the governmental decision-makers will work with experienced legal interpreters, rather than just the agencies, to ensure that the best and safest and best possible policies and procedures are put in place ready for this momentous step forward for Deaf people’s equality.
sashadiestal
March 10, 2021
Did you know that very few interpreters will work in courts simply because it is too complex! How they will manage over a number of days or weeks I have no idea! And a different interpreter maybe lost if they are not up to date with what went on the day or week before! In all seriousness the difficulties for Deaf people serving on juries has not been thoroughly thought through at all…….government officials are just doing what campaigners have badgered for!!!!!
bslterp
March 9, 2021
I emailed you earlier with a response to this but have just realised that what I have said is a bit confusing. Can you please withdraw my comment?????
Many thanks,
Gloria
sashadiestal
March 10, 2021
This sounds fabulous! Just what we needed! But hang on a minute, don’t interpreters complain they are not doing more than an hour on their own? Of course they do, so that means over a full day we would be using two interpreters. And what about a notetaker? How will Deaf people remember everything? Some cases are seriously complex is this going to be easily conveyed in BSL or will interpreters struggle? If they struggle the Deaf BSL user has no chance of dispensing justice. And BSL users will likely struggle if things are written down to remember, given they usually lack English skills. If truth be told I am seriously worried about this ‘fantastic opportunity’ for Deaf people to serve on juries!!
srhplfrth
March 10, 2021
Very welcome news. Several years ago, I challenged the refusal to provide an interpreter so I could take up my jury position. My MP was very supportive and many letters went back and forth. Ultimately a review was promised, but with no date given, I wasn’t hopeful. But now, at last, this anomaly will be removed. Great stuff, well done to all campaigners,
Veronica
March 10, 2021
I am all for it of course,I would love to be a member of the jury but won’t it be a hindrance to the others members of the jury by slowing them down with the interpreting needed a break, changeover. Also asking the jury to repeat and not to talk over each other during a debate. Also the court and jury will need deaf awareness before we even start.
So a bit of a way to go before we get there and I hope it will be a success and not a shambles. I know I sound negative but there is hope and it can be done I have no doubt bout it. The important thing is getting it right first time or we end up getting throw out of court. (Joking)
Vera
March 11, 2021
I think what’s important here is not us, this time, but the rights of the defendant, I hear very well nowadays with a cochlear implant but I wouldn’t want to be on a jury. I’m not confident I could hear/understand EVERYTHING, and you need to. Someone’s liberty might be at stake. Sometimes there are bigger issues than deafness.
Cathy
March 11, 2021
Vera, this is exactly my worry. How on earth can anyone dispense justice if they barely understand what has happened?! It is not feasible. Many Deaf people will manage, with a bit of luck, but others will barely manage. This puts cases at risk and most of us know that Lawyers and Barristers could argue that the case is in jeopardy and their client is not getting a fair trial etc etc. I was called ignorant by a deaf woman on Facebook for bringing up this sort of issue, but like you say Vera, there are bigger issues than deafness here and that is: Justice for those on trial! That in no way can be called: ignorant!
srhplfrth
March 11, 2021
The change is not just about deaf people now being able to serve but about removing the rule that says you cannot have an extra person in the jury room when discussion happens, This means anyone who needs another person with them for any reason, including an interpreter for a deaf person, can now have that support and take part equally in the discussion. That means the defendant’s rights will be met.
Ian D
March 11, 2021
Cathy, the deaf woman who called you “ignorant” has proved to be ignorant herself. Deaf people who use BSL and are involved in a trial do have access to BSL interpreters, but this in itself may not always be enough. Sometimes the unspoken word is louder. Hearing juries usually pick these up, but for some deaf people the BSL interpretation do not always convey the unsaid (eg. context, tone or expressions) correctly. Mistakes have occurred to the detriment of deaf people in court – I know this from my experience.
srhplfrth
March 11, 2021
Interesting variety of views in comments. Given that being called for jury service is random, so we are not talking about hordes of deaf people sitting and I suspect there will be enough suitably qualified and experienced interpreters to meet the need when the situation arises, There will, quite reasonably, be deaf people loath to do it and I’d hope this change wouldn’t mean they were legally bound to take it on. The last comment is logical in relation to an deaf person without communication support, but the whole point of this change is that deaf people would have communication support for equal access to the discussions, so the rights of the defendant can be met.
Comment
March 15, 2021
This bill promotes the rights of deaf jurors but at the expense of the removal of other liberties – including the right to protest. I cannot say I am in favour of this bill even though I agree with deaf people having access to jury duty – any protest deemed ‘annoying’ will be deemed illegal, how are we supposed to defend our right to free speech if we are silenced by the government? This is part of a much bigger, much more worrying picture spun by UK gov.
srhplfrth
March 15, 2021
Now that’s become clear, my personal view is that, although I was one of the deaf people called for jury service who fought to take up my place with an interpreter, I’d put the right to protest above the right to do jury service.