«People’s element» in justice: world trends and national peculiarities

The participation of public representatives as non-professional judges in criminal cases is a phenomenon that has become popular in world legal practice. Contrary to the apparent evidence that the layperson is incapable in judging legal disputes, the number of countries that do not admit the «people’s element» in one form or another is traditionally negligible. The purpose is to show that the fundamental choice between exclusively «professional» criminal justice and justice «with a human element» and the choice of procedural forms of using the «people’s element» in world history have always depended on the specific social and political conditions of the states in the specific period of their development. Based on the comparative legal and historical methods, it is shown that despite the diversity of lay participation in justice, world practice has developed two fundamentally different models, which can be conditionally called «jury» and «court of lay assessors». The system of distinguishing criteria between these models has demonstrated its historical mobility, which has required modern studies to divide the features of both models into substantive (essential) and subsidiary (optional). The result: The conclusion is formulated that the «people’s element» in justice is a dialogue between the state and the society that goes far beyond criminal proceedings. The correct definition of models of lay participation’ essential features in justice, the possibility of combining them in national legal systems or mixing them in some hybrid forms need theoretical analysis in order to solve practical problems of optimizing the functioning of the judiciary in any country.