Judicial ‘Guidebook’ Bringing New Zealand Law Into Line with others

Judgehammer

In a first for New Zealand, a guidebook for judges has been released in a move that provides transparency and also brings New Zealand into line with other jurisdictions.

Criminal Jury Trials Bench Book is published by the Institute for Judicial Studies and brings New Zealand in line with other jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom and Australia, where such resources have been available for years.

The Criminal Jury Trials Bench Book serves as a comprehensive guide for judges, offering non-binding guidance on various aspects of criminal trials.

It covers topics ranging from basic court procedures to more complex issues like handling vulnerable witnesses and summing up in criminal trials. While primarily intended for judges, the public release of this resource is expected to benefit the legal profession as a whole and enhance public understanding of court processes.

Justice Matthew Palmer, chair of the Institute of Judicial Studies, emphasized that the bench book is not a binding document and does not carry the same authority as judicial decisions. It is merely one of many resources that judges may choose to consult in their work. The bench book will be continually updated to ensure its relevance and accuracy.

The book contains 140 hypothetical fact scenarios designed to guide juries in their deliberations. These “question trails” provide logically sequenced questions in plain English, helping jurors navigate the elements of a charge that the Crown must prove to establish guilt.

The Institute of Judicial Studies plans to make more bench books available in the near future. Te Puna Manawa Whenua – The Māori Land Court Bench Book is scheduled for release in early 2025, followed by the Sexual Violence Trials Bench Book and Te Puna Manawa Whenua–Judging in Context: A Handbook later that year.

Associate Professor Carrie Leonetti from the University of Auckland Law School previously highlighted the importance of making bench books available for public scrutiny, arguing that it promotes open justice and allows for expert review of the guidance provided to judges.

Scroll to Top