GIURATI. — So called from the oath by which they bind themselves to the proper fulfillment of their office, the giurati (jurors) are a body of citizens belonging to categories listed by law, possessing special cultural and moral qualifications, called to judge in criminal cases whether the accused is guilty or not and consequently to cooperate in the administration of criminal justice.
The distinctive feature of the body of jurors is that it is composed of elements drawn from every class of citizens, in observance of the principle upheld by penalists that while the search for evidence of a crime requires skill and dexterity, the judgment of the result requires only ordinary common sense, which is sometimes less fallible than the knowledge of a judge habituated to a mentality that is the fruit of abstract studies alone.
The institution of the jurors originated in England, was adopted by the French Constituent Assembly, and subsequently spread throughout Europe. Canon law has never admitted the institution of jurors, so as not to divide the task of judging. In Italy, by a law of 13 November 1859, the Assize Courts were established with jurors.
The jurors therefore form part of the judging panel, but without the legal power to deliver the sentence or impose the penalty. They can only pronounce on the existence of the fact and the guilt of the accused. This is the task imposed on them by positive law. In carrying it out, they must also bear in mind other principles of a moral order.
First of all, the jurors must answer the questions on the basis of an inner and conscientious conviction, so that they cannot and must not condemn an innocent person even if all appearances accuse him. On the contrary, they may, in conscience, answer in favor of the true guilty party when his guilt has not been legitimately and adequately demonstrated. An exception is made when the public good demands the condemnation of some criminal; in that case, however, the jurors should not appear in judgment as such, but as witnesses (cf. A. Ballerini-D. Palmieri, Opus theologicum morale, IV, 3rd ed., Prato 1900, n. 592).
Similarly, if one enjoying the privilege of the forum (cf. CIC, cann. 120, 614, 680) were improperly cited before a lay tribunal, the jurors, if they cannot avoid judging, may always vote in favor of the accused, inasmuch as he is subject to an incompetent tribunal (cf. A. Ballerini-D. Palmieri, op. cit., n. 591).
If a citizen called to the office of juror were hesitant on account of a consciousness of his own ignorance in matters of law, moral doctrine does not absolutely require him to excuse himself, provided that he intends not to condemn anyone unless the guilt is clearly established. Natural law does not indeed require that all criminals be punished, but it does require that no innocent person be condemned (cf. A. Ballerini-D. Palmieri, op. cit., n. 591).
The institution of the jurors, which had been abolished in Italy by the penal and criminal procedure codes of 1931, was partially restored by the legislative decrees of the Lieutenant of 6 April 1944, no. 170 and 5 December 1944, no. 290, with the establishment of popular judges. The definitive organization of the Assize Courts is currently under discussion in Parliament.