Jury Silence and the Duty to Give Reasons

Notes on the Jujuy Proposal

Abstract

This paper examines the jury trial model proposed in the Province of Jujuy, focusing on the constitutional and conventional duty to provide reasons for judicial decisions. It highlights tensions between the division of roles—the jury as judge of fact and the professional judge as judge of law—and the principles of due process, the right to defense, and effective judicial review. Drawing on the standards of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, judicial instructions, the principle of rational assessment of evidence, and local regulations, the paper argues that while jury trials are constitutionally admissible, their validity requires procedural safeguards that allow for the reconstruction of the reasoning behind the verdict, thereby ensuring their compatibility with both national and international legal frameworks.