There have recently been critical calls to fix Queensland's jury system. The current jury system is said to be obsolete and as Ian Turnball (2001) states "Our jury system is a legacy of England's distant past". However, for change to occur, an investigation into the history, strengths and weaknesses of the jury system must be carried out. To then allow a discussion on alternative strategies or recommendations to improve the effectiveness of the system. The right to trial by jury was enabled when the Queensland Constitution was passed in 1867. A jury is a group of 12 citizens chosen to represent society and hear at trial for an indictable offence. They are required to decide, based on the evidence and facts presented during the trial, the guilt or innocence of a defendant, while ensuring justice. The relevant legislation governing the jury system in Queensland is the Jury Act 1995 (QLD). The purpose of this legislation is to provide information about who is eligible to become a juror, who may be excused from jury duty, and to help prepare a potential juror. sworn. Stakeholders in the current jury system include: defendants, who rely on the jury to deliver their justice; the victim of a crime, who depends on the system to ensure that the accused is punished for the harm he or she may have caused; State legislators, the government, because of their involvement in the system; as well as the courts, which use this system to serve justice and to determine the innocence or guilt of a defendant. There is no doubt that the current jury system has several strengths. In current jury procedures, all twelve jurors must agree on the verdict of a case. As a result, the unanimous result is more likely to be accepted by corporate involvement and there would be too much pressure on one person to place the onus for the verdict. . Therefore removing the unanimous verdict would be a more appropriate change. In this way, Queensland's system is consistent with most other states. This method is not only faster and cheaper, but it also puts less pressure on jurors to achieve unanimity. Evidently, Queensland's jury system is not up to standard. This is evident when exploring the history, strengths and weaknesses and when comparing with alternative systems such as those used in other Australian states. Works Cited Turnbull, I. 2001. A suggested alternative to the Australian jury system. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=1273 (accessed 4 June 2011) Constitution Act 1867. 2002. http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/ C/ConstA1867.pdf (consulted May 28, 2011)