Reconciliation of jury secrecy in light of administrative law principles

Juries in criminal law trials are said to represent the bulwark of justice in Australia. The jury is said to bring with it the representation, quite directly, of the wider community to the fundamental promotion of justice. Yet, interestingly, the jury is prohibited from providing reasons for their decision. Such a prohibition is said to rest upon many arguments, one of which is the impediment of the proper administration of justice. Despite the foregoing, there has been a growing trend in recent years that administrators provide reasons for their decision, so as to promote the administration of justice and ensure justice is not only done, but is also seen to be done. Such is said, quite rightly so, to demonstrate transparency and open justice. This article argues that various administrative law principles not only seriously call into question the jury secrecy principle, but also suggest that the prohibition of the provision of reasons for a decision by the jury is inconsistent with dictates of proper open decision making.