I.   Introduction

While the American jury system is unique and allows the American citizenry to make important decisions, even those concerning life and death, a relatively small number of nations have implemented similar procedures to try their accused.  The most recent country that has provided for trial by jury in certain circumstances is Argentina.  The Constitution of Argentina, and at least one Argentine provincial constitution, that of the Province of Cordoba, provide for trial by jury. [1]   

While the Argentine Constitution has provided trial by jury for over 150 years, only recently has that constitutional provision been implemented. [2]  Trial by jury was first introduced in the province of Cordoba, Argentina, on August 22^nd, 2005. [3] The question remains, why has it taken 150 years for an Argentine court to hold its first trial by jury?  While the political reasons for this development in the country are obscure, possible explanations exist that may explain why a jury system has recently been established in one of Argentina's provinces. 

This paper will assert that a combination of factors, economic, political and criminal, were responsible for the recent emergence of the Cordoban jury system.  The jury system that Cordoba has implemented will be described at length, including the details of the Luna trial, the first trial by jury in Argentine history.  Additionally, the future outlook of the Argentine jury system will be explored in detail.  Finally, the American jury system, more specifically, Washington's system, will be compared to the Cordoban system to determine the positive and negative aspects of each.  While it has taken Argentina many decades to institute trial by jury, nonetheless, it has transpired; as Shakespeare's Petruchio said in The Taming of the Shrew: "Better once than never, for never too late." [4] 

II.  Origins of the Argentine Jury System

            A.  Argentine Constitutional Provisions Regarding Trial by Jury

Like that of the United States, the Argentine Constitution contains various provisions that not only allow trial by jury within its national legal system, but require it.  Specifically, Articles 24, 75, and 118 of the Argentine Constitution call for trial by jury. [5]  Not only does the Argentine National Constitution contain provisions that require its judiciary to institute jury trials, but certain Argentine provincial constitutions do as well.  One such constitution is that of the Province of Cordoba which lies just northwest of Buenos Aires, particularly Section 3, Chapter 1, Article 162, which allows jury trials as established by legislative action. [6]

As mentioned, the Argentine National Constitution establishes trial by jury in three sections:

• 1) Article 24: Congress shall promote the reform of the present legislation in all its branches, and the establishment of trial by jury;
• 2) Article 75, Section 12: Congress shall . . . enact (the laws) that may be required to establish trial by jury;
• 3) Article 118: The trial of all ordinary criminal cases not arising from the right to impeach granted to the House of Deputies shall be decided by jury once this institution is established in the Nation. The trial shall be held in the province where the crime has been committed; but when committed outside the territory of the Nation against public international law, the trial shall be held at such place as Congress may determine by a special law. [7]

Again, while the Argentine Constitution expressly provides for trial by jury, so too does the Provincial Constitution of Cordoba, particularly Section 3, Chapter 1, Article 162, which states: "The law may determine the situations in which jurors may be utilized." [8]  Thus far, trial by jury in Argentina has only been implemented at the provincial level. [9]  The first trial by popular jury in Argentine history occurred in the city of San Francisco, province of Cordoba, when Victor Fernando Luna was tried and convicted of aggravated murder with a fire arm. [10]  The Luna trial will be discussed later in greater detail.  Since the Luna trial, a major national newspaper reported that, as of May 21, 2006, there have been six additional jury trials that have resulted in nine convictions and two acquittals. [11]  All seven of Argentina's jury trials have occurred within the Province of Cordoba.

B.  Argentine Economic Situation Prior to Argentina's First Trial by Jury

Before describing Argentina's first jury trial, it is important to first understand its possible genesis. 

It is the intention of the constituent to carry out criminal trials in the Argentine Republic through . . . [ its Constitution].  However, and not knowing why, [the jury system was not established in Argentina until recently, even though the Argentine Constitution itself provides for such a system] . . . .  It is difficult to understand how it is possible for a fundamental regulation of a rule of law to lose validity just because political powers do not comply with it. [12]

Even Argentine legal experts admit that they are unsure as to why the country's national assembly has chosen to ignore constitutional mandates for over 150 years.  While no clear explanation accounts for legislative inaction for a century and a half, recent developments provide clues explaining why trial by jury has recently surfaced in the province of Cordoba.  More specifically, it is my contention that the newly implemented jury system in Cordoba was established as a result of political volatility, economic instability and an increased crime rate; thus, all three factors created the necessary environment for the Cordoban provincial assembly to establish such a system. 

Since 1999, Argentina has experienced many disruptive events involving political corruption, economic irresponsibility, and increased crime that have caused its citizens to lose faith in their own government. [13]  In 2001, Argentina suffered its worst economic collapse in a century. [14]  Before that collapse, the Argentine economy slipped into recession in late 1999 and was forced to seek help from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and private banks to reduce its debt. [15]  In response, Argentina received an aid package of nearly $40 billion. [16]  To revive the economy, the Argentine government instituted a $20 billion public works project, and pegged the peso for imports and exports to the average value of the dollar and the euro. [17]  Despite such corrective measures, the Argentine economy continued to suffer and the country remained in recession. [18]  In November 2001, the government essentially put itself into default by restructuring its debt. [19]  By the end of 2001, the Argentine unemployment rate rose to around 20%. [20]  As a result of these severe economic problems, depositors began losing confidence in the economy and withdrew substantial assets from Argentine banks. [21]

            C.  Argentine Political Climate Prior to Argentina's First Trial by Jury

During this economic crisis, political turmoil and instability spread.  In December, 2001, the President of Argentina, Fernando de la Rua, resigned after nationwide food riots and demonstrations erupted. [22]  Following de la Rua's unfruitful reign, a series of unsuccessful interim presidents presided over the struggling country, which ended with the appointment by the Legislative Assembly of Peronista senator Eduardo Alberto Duhalde in January, 2002. [23]  The myriad political changes experienced by the Argentines perpetuated their distrust and contempt for their own national government. [24]  Duhalde appeared to make matters worse after he devalued the peso, which lost more than two thirds of its value, and furthered the Argentine economic crisis, or so it appeared. [25]

D.  Argentine Crime Prior to Argentina's First Trial by Jury

The Argentine economic and political disarray from 2001 forward has produced an increase in crime, especially kidnappings. [26]  In 2004, Buenos Aires was in the midst of a wave of kidnappings, with many of them ending in murder or in the disappearance of the victim. [27]  In fact, police statistics for 2003 show that a kidnapping was reported every 48 hours in the Buenos Aires area and more than 400 kidnappings were reported nationwide in that year. [28]  One such kidnapping and murder was that of Axel Blumberg, an engineering student, whose father was a textile engineer. [29]  Since "a large portion of Argentine society viewed (and still views) the police forces as corrupt and inefficient, political leaders as unsupportive, and penal laws excessively lenient," Axel Blumberg's murder was the catalyst for large demonstrations across the country, with citizens calling for a variety of governmental reforms, including the institution of jury trials in cases of homicide involving kidnapping. [30]  In fact, Juan Carlos Blumberg, Axel's father stated: "[m]ay the same people who suffer the consequences of crime be the jury." [31]

Following the attention garnered by Blumberg through various protests and demonstrations, public officials began to take notice of the problems occurring within the country and began to initiate procedures to cure such problems, including certain remedies advocated by him, particularly the institution of jury trials. [32]  One such public official who understood the importance of trial by jury was Jose Manuel de la Sota, Governor of Cordoba, which is one of the larger, more populous, and prosperous provinces in Argentina. [33]  Governor de la Sota actively supported provincial legislation calling for jury trials for certain crimes. [34]  That legislation was enacted by the province's Assembly on January 1^st, 2005. [35]

III.  Cordoban Legislation Regarding Trial by Jury

By establishing procedures for a jury system, the Province of Cordoba now complies with Article 162 of the Provincial Constitution of Cordoba, which calls for charges of certain crimes to be determined by popular juries. [36]  Today, trial by jury in Cordoba is utilized for economic crimes, crimes involving aggravated homicide, sexual crimes that result in the death of the offended person, kidnappings that result in death, homicide that involves torture, and homicide in cases of robbery. [37]  However, other crimes may also require a jury depending upon the seriousness of the crime. [38]  Interestingly, in those settings in which the provincial constitution and enabling legislation provides for trial by jury, a jury must be used. [39]  The provincial penal code makes no provision for waiver of the jury by the defendant, nor is there any provisions allowing "plea bargaining." [40]  On a final note, like the Spanish system, the Cordoban approach conceptualizes the criminal jury trial not as a right of the accused, but a right of the citizenry in general. [41]

Cordoban juries consist of eight primary jurors and four alternates; [42] each jury panel should be representative of the community where the accused will be tried. [43]  Jurors must satisfy five requirements to serve.  They 1) must be between 25 years of age and 65 years of age; 2) must have completed basic educational requirements as mandated by the Argentine government; 3) must be Argentine citizens; 4) must be physically and psychologically able to perform as a jurors; and 5) must be a permanent residents of no less than five years of the Province of Cordoba. [44] 

Even if a person satisfies the aforementioned requirements, certain employment may preclude some from serving as jurors.  Those excluded are people employed in public service, including those involved with either the legislative, executive, and/or judicial branches of either the provincial or the national government; [45] heads of political parties, either provincial or national; lawyers, including public defenders that work in the local judiciary where the accused will be tried; [46] court clerks; members of the armed forces; [47] and active police and/or other security officials; [48] the clergy of nationally recognized religions; and members of the provincial or municipal accounting offices. [49] 

In addition to those disqualified from serving as jurors by virtue of their employment, individuals are disqualified from serving as jurors if they have been convicted of certain crimes. [50]  Those who have been charged with a crime and are currently involved as a defendant in criminal proceedings may not serve as jurors. [51]  Finally, those who are in bankruptcy proceedings may not serve as jurors. [52]

Regarding the juror selection process, the Provincial Electoral Court compiles lists containing the names of citizens who comply with the above requirements. [53]  Each potential juror list contains the names of both females and males who are registered to vote and is divided by judicial district and gender. [54]  Voter registration is automatic and mandatory in Argentina; therefore, the jury source list is an inclusive and fully representative list. [55]  The potential juror lists are compiled at random; one male out of every 1,500 in a judicial district will be selected and placed on the aforementioned list as well as one woman out of every 1,500 females. [56] 

After potential juror lists are created, an expert from the Professional College of Information Sciences and representatives from the Colleges of Lawyers of the Province of Cordoba verify the compiled lists and make any necessary corrections. [57]  After the potential juror lists are verified and finalized, the lists are published in the Official Bulletin of the Province before the 30^th day of November of every calendar year. [58]

In addition to publishing the potential juror lists, the Cordoban Provincial Electoral Court also posts those lists in each judicial district of the Province at each judicial district's superior court. [59]  Moreover, potential jurors receive a notice in the mail regarding their impending jury service, which must be mailed back indicating whether that person still lives within the judicial district where the trial will be held. [60]  Once a superior court of justice receives the verified information from potential jurors, and if they meet the legal requirements to be jurors, the superior court will create a definitive list of potential jurors for every judicial district. [61]  Each juror then has 15 days from the time when the list is posted to make any corrections regarding his or her information. [62] 

After the correct information is confirmed on each potential juror list, that list is randomly narrowed to 24 potential jurors, twelve male and twelve female. [63]  Those 24 potential jurors are then each numbered 1-24. [64]  Those jurors numbered 1-12 will tentatively serve as jurors; the first eight being the primary jurors while the remaining four are alternates. [65]  However, those numbered 1-12 are subject to peremptory challenges, challenges for cause, or for any other valid excuse, including sickness. [66]  If a juror is excused for any of the above reasons, the next numbered prospective juror will be called and seated. [67]

Regarding excusal from jury service, a juror may be excused from jury duty when he or she is found ill or when one of his or her immediate family members is ill, requiring the potential juror's care. [68]  Furthermore, one may be excused from jury service if that service would cause that person economic hardship. [69]  In order to be eligible for excusal, the juror must request it in writing and an alternate must be seated within two days of the trial. [70]  Again, if a juror is excused from jury duty for one of these reasons, or from death, an alternate juror will be seated. [71]

Just as jurors in Washington can be dismissed with or without cause, so can jurors in Cordoba.  A prospective juror may be excused for cause from serving if he or she has prejudged the case and such prejudgment will affect his or her impartiality. [72]  However, no juror can be excluded based on race, religion, sex, nationality, and/or economic situation. [73]  Finally, the defense attorney and the prosecutor may, within three days after the final juror list is established, each exercise one peremptory challenge and dismiss a juror without cause. [74]

Once the final jurors are selected and have served in their official capacity, they are compensated for their time and expenditures. [75]  More specifically, the Province of Cordoba reimburses jurors for food, lodging, and transportation. [76]

The eight jurors who hear each case are joined by three technical (legally trained) judges. [77]  One of the technical judges is selected as the President and is entrusted to conduct and moderate the trial and answers any questions the jurors may have. [78]  While the President comprises one of the three technical judges, the President does not normally vote, but does participate in the jury deliberations. [79]  However, the President may cast a vote of guilt or innocence in the case of a tie. [80]  While the President may only vote in that event, the other two technical judges deliberate and vote with the lay jurors to determine a defendant's guilt or innocence. [81]

Once trial begins, the jurors may not be exposed to the circumstances of the general criminal investigation, but may only have access to the evidence presented during the actual trial. [82]  After all testimony has been given, the judges and jurors deliberate in a closed session. [83]  If the jurors or witnesses are subject to any pressures, or outside influences, either direct or indirect, they must write any such occurrence on paper and submit them to the court. [84]  When such conditions arise, the court can prohibit the jurors and the alternates from any contact with outside third parties or from reading or viewing media communications during the trial to avoid tampering or the creation of any prejudgment. [85] 

After the jurors have successfully heard a case, they are to deliberate concerning all issues argued before them. [86]  In order to formulate a decision, it is advised that the jurors and technical judges consider the following guidelines, in the order given:

1)  All disputed facts;

2)  All the facts surrounding the alleged crime, taking into account the relevant law;

3)  The participation of the accused in the crime;

4)  The legal standards and their applicable sanctions;

5) The requested restitution or sentence; and

6) Costs. [87] 

All juror decisions concerning the issues of a case must be determined by at least a majority vote. [88]

In determining the guilt or innocence of an accused, the jurors take into account all of the guidelines from Article 41, while the two technical judges consider the second and third guidelines (the facts of the case as applied to the law and the participation of the accused) in order to determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant. [89]  If there is a discrepancy in the voting between the technical judges and the jurors and a majority decision has been reached by the jurors, the President will review the relevant law with the jurors to make sure that they understand the law to be applied and the undisputed facts of the case. [90]  In other words, both technical judges must vote contrary to the majority juror decision for the President to review the relevant law and facts with the jurors. [91]  Moreover, if the jurors do not reach a unanimous decision those jurors's votes which were in opposition to the majority will be counted with either of the technical judge's vote if one or both of the technical judges supported the minority position. [92]  For example, if five jurors vote to acquit and three vote to convict, while one technical judge votes to acquit, the voting composition will result in six votes to acquit and four to convict.  Since decisions in Cordoba are based upon a majority vote, the defendant in the example would be convicted of his or her crime.  Finally, the technical judges are required to determine the sentence, which must be in accordance with legal penal requirements. [93]

In order to promote the emerging jury system in Cordoba, and the rest of Argentina, the provincial secretary of justice and the provincial superior courts of justice have organized courses designed to educate Argentine citizens as to the duties of jurors and the advantages of the jury system. [94]  However, individuals need not have completed such a course to serve as jurors. [95]

IV.  First Jury Trial in Argentine History (The Trial of Victor Fernando Luna)

Despite Argentine federal constitutional provisions that call for the use of lay jurors under certain circumstances, the first court in Argentine judicial history that has applied such provisions was a provincial court in the city of San Francisco, province of Cordoba. [96]  This historic case involved the alleged acts of Victor Fernando Luna, who was accused of aggravated murder with malice for using a firearm in the death of Marcos Brito on July 5^th, 2003. [97]

The District Attorney contended that Brito was murdered in the following manner. [98]  At 1:30 p.m., Gonzalo Maurice Rodlan was driving a black motorcycle while carrying a passenger, Brito, near the area where Luna both lived and worked. [99]  The prosecution asserted that Luna was aware of Brito's presence that day and of his propensity to travel past his residence and place of employment, which was also his father's butcher shop. [100]  Next, the prosecution argued that Luna placed himself atop the roof of his father's butcher shop where, with premeditation, he planned to shoot Brito as he passed. [101]  Just as Luna had planned, Roldan and Brito stopped at the expected intersection.  While they waited for the traffic light to change green, Luna fired his 32-caliber millimeter rifle in the direction of Roldan and Brito, hitting Brito in the chest. [102]  Immediately after being shot, Brito fell to the pavement from the motorcycle and died. [103]  Following the murder of Brito, the District Attorney asserted that Luna fled the area, but was apprehended about six months later. [104]

In response, the defendant Luna argued that he knew nothing of Brito's murder. [105]  In fact, he claimed that he has never owned a weapon, nor did he know how to use any type of firearm. [106]  He further claimed that he did not flee the area after Brito's death, but was taking care of his sick grandmother who was on the verge of death, and has since died. [107]  Finally, Luna asserted that he was not trying to flee, but that the police simply failed to look for him at his grandmother's house. [108]

Following Luna's apprehension, the District Attorney, Mr. Victor Hugo Pezzano, instituted a prosecution for homicide, asking that Luna be sentenced to 14 years in prison for the murder of Marcos Brito. [109]  In response to the prosecutor's charge, Luna's defense attorney argued that there was no evidence implicating his client as the one who shot Brito; in fact, he pointed out that the gun used to kill Brito was never found, and that the one witness produced by the prosecution did not actually see Luna shoot Brito from the butcher shop roof, but only heard the gunshot. [110]  Ultimately, Luna's defense attorney stated that the prosecution did not prove the State's case beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore Luna should be found innocent of all charges. [111]

After three stages of oral argument, a majority of the jury, comprised of four males and four females, found Mr. Luna guilty of aggravated homicide with a fire arm, and sentenced him to prison for 12 years, two less than the District Attorney requested. [112]  The sentence was reduced two years from that requested by the prosecution after technical judges Hugo Roberto Ferrero and Mario Miguel Comes decided that Mr. Luna did not kill Mr. Brito with "treachery," or "malice," which is required to impose the maximum sentence. [113]  The eight jurors included Norma Rueda, a housekeeper; Silvana Iniguez, a business woman; Norma Gallo, a retailer; Ana Paulin, a calligrapher; Adrien Gagliardi, an engineer; Mauricio Suarez, a college student; Luis Daniel Cassol, a truck driver; and Gabriel Mathiev, a businessman. [114]  Following the verdict, the defense lawyer, Mr. Martinez Cherini, stated that he would appeal Luna's case to the Court of Appeals. [115] 

V.  Future Outlook of the Argentine Jury System

            It appears that the jury system is being embraced in the Cordoban province and is gaining momentum around the country as the Luna trial received considerable publicity nation-wide. [116]  Following the Luna trial, six other jury trials have taken place at the time of this writing in the province of Cordoba, which have resulted in eight more convictions and two acquittals: 

• 1) In the city of Bell Ville, Eduardo Altamirano and Hector Beewsaert were convicted of robbery with an illegal firearm and each sentenced to 12 years in prison; [117]
• 2) In the capital city of Cordoba, Carlos and Pedro Trejo were sentenced to 15 and 19 years in prison, respectively, for robbery and aggravated homicide; [118]
• 3) Again, in the city of Cordoba, Victor Hugo Aguirre was sentenced to 14 years in prison for homicide while committing a robbery; [119]
• 4) In Villa Dolores, Walter Mora was sentenced to 18 years in prison for aggravated homicide; [120]
• 5) Again, in Villa Dolores, Alfredo Briones was acquitted of homicide; [121]
• 6) In Villa Maria, Ariel Luis Roa was sentenced to life in prison for homicide and robbery, while Juan Manuel Albornoz was acquitted of aiding and abetting Mr. Roa. [122]

The jury was unanimous in all of these verdicts. [123]       

Another indication that trial by jury may become more widespread in Argentina is the extension of jury trials in the province to economic crimes.  Under the original provincial legislation, jury trials were limited to certain crimes, in particular: aggravated murder, kidnapping with extortion, murder with torture, murder with robbery, and sexual crimes. [124]  Under very recent legislation, jury trials have been expanded and can now be utilized for economic and other serious crimes. [125]  Juror procedures and requirements for economic crimes are similar, but there are some important differences. [126]  First, the number of jurors who decide economic crimes is four, instead of the usual eight. [127]  While two of the jurors may be lay jurors, the other two must meet special requirements. [128]  Two of the four jurors must have been legally trained to the level of an attorney, and must also be specialists in the area of economics. [129]  In addition to the four jurors, jury trials involving economic crimes also require three technical judges, one of which acts as the President. [130]  Finally, jurors hearing economic crimes must still be at least 25 years old, but now cannot exceed 70 years of age instead of 65. [131]  Such procedures ensure that there remains citizen participation in trials as required by Articles 24, 75, and 118 of the Argentine National Constitution, and by Article 162 of the Provincial Constitution of Cordoba, coupled with experts who can understand the complexity of economic issues. 

While the jury system has yet to become a prominent feature within the Argentine judiciary, it is gaining momentum and will likely be instituted in other provinces, as well as by Argentine federal courts.  Argentina, like the United States, has a federal system of government; in addition to provincial courts, which have jurisdiction to try offenses defined by provincial penal codes, there exists a parallel system of federal courts, with jurisdiction over offenses defined as federal crimes by the Argentine National Congress. [132]  In fact, the Argentine Senate has convened to discuss and consider legislation implementing the jury system at the federal level due to the overwhelming support it has received by many, including Argentine legal experts. [133]  Many of these experts have expressed their satisfaction with the Cordoban jury system and feel that it would be a valuable process.  Judge Cristian Requena, who presided over the Luna trial as President of the Tribunal stated: "At the beginning, I had reservations, but today, I am convinced that the [jury] system is extremely useful and opens a path of popular participation where it did not previously exist." [134] 

VI.  Comparisons Between the Jury Systems of the Province of Cordoba and Washington State

Strikingly, the jury systems in both Cordoba and Washington State are very similar, but there are of course important differences.  First, as already noted, trial by jury is a constitutional right in both Argentina and the United States, even though trial by jury is a new phenomenon in Argentina, particularly Cordoba.  While the United States judiciary has had over 200 years to perfect its jury system, it can learn some important practices from the system being instituted in Cordoba.

When comparing jury systems, the first feature evaluated is the jury qualifications of each system.  In Washington State, one may qualify for jury service if: 1) he/she is over 18 years old; 2) a United States citizen; 3) a resident of the county in which he or she has been summoned to serve; 4) can speak English; and 5) has not been convicted of a felony. [135]  While some requirements to serve as a juror in Cordoba are similar to those requirements imposed by Washington State statute, differences exist.  Again, a potential juror in Cordoba must be: 1) over 25 year old; 2) must have completed basic educational requirements as mandated by the Argentine government; 3) must be a citizen of Argentina; 4) must be physically and psychologically able to perform as a juror; and 5) must be a permanent resident of no less than five years of the Province of Cordoba. [136]  Again, it is important to note that an accused in Argentina may not waive a jury as no such provision exists within Cordoban law. [137]  Finally, since voter registration in Argentina is automatic, the source lists are inevitably inclusive, resulting in jury panels being drawn from a fair cross-section the community. [138]

While both systems have age and residence requirements, Cordoba's requirements appear to be more stringent, imposing certain minimal educational requirements, which may ensure that one accused of a crime in Argentina will have more educated jurors on any given panel.  In fact, it appears that the only educational requirement in the Washington jury system is that one speaks English.  In this respect, it may be important for Washington to adopt some sort of minimal educational standard to ensure that their jurors comprehend their judicial duties.  Conversely, such educational requirements may conflict with a court's goal of creating a jury panel that is drawn from a fair cross-section of society, [139] which is a well settled principle of American law. [140]  Instituting educational requirements will undoubtedly preclude many from jury service, thus making it more difficult to create a jury panel that represents a fair cross-section of the community.

Another aspect of the Cordoban jury system that does not appear to promote a court's goal of creating a jury that represents a fair cross-section of society is that it excludes people in a wide range of professions from service. [141]  As a result, valuable potential jurors, people such as police officers, lawyers, and clergy, are not able to serve as jurors.  To ensure that a Cordoban jury is comprised of a fair cross-section of society, it should allow anyone to become a potential juror, no matter their profession, provided of course that they meet the guidelines previously mentioned, such as the age requirement.  Alternatively, the Cordoban system may allow for the likelihood of jurors actually being more representative of the community as the original source list is drawn from the registered voter list; in Cordoba, and the rest of Argentina, everyone is automatically registered to vote, which is not the case in the United States. [142]  As a result, the source lists generated in Cordoba are probably larger and may be more representative of the community than Washington state source lists since voting registration is not mandatory here.  However, Washington source lists are also drawn from driver's licenses and state identification cards, in addition to voter registration. [143] 

Those cases in which jury trials are appropriate differ as well.  In Cordoba, trial by jury is required in those cases involving economic crimes, aggravated homicide, sexual crimes that result in the death of the offended person, kidnapping that results in death, homicide that involves torture, homicides that result from robbery, and other serious crimes. [144]  Again, a jury cannot be waived by a defendant in Argentina as it is in the United States.  [145]  Jury trials are of course much more widely available in Washington State; a jury trial in Washington is an option for anyone charged with an offense that can result in incarceration. [146] 

Additional important differences between Cordoban and Washington jury systems are the number and composition of those whom may serve on a jury and the role of judges in each respective system.  In Cordoba, eight jurors, four males and four females, and three technical judges, are entrusted to hear a case, while in Washington, there are either six or twelve jurors with no gender specific requirements, and one judge. [147]  Cordoba's practice to allow an equal number of male and female jurors on a panel appears to be extremely useful if a court realistically wants to create a jury that represents a fair cross-section of any given society because it eliminates the problems associated with either having too many men or women on any given jury. 

Not only is the jury composition different in Cordoba than in Washington, but the role of judges differ as well.  In Washington, the judges preside over the case and determine the applicable law, while in Cordoba, the judges deliberate with the jurors and vote on the innocence or guilt of the accused, which may have some serious ramifications. [148]  Even though the Cordoban jury system allows two technical judges to vote with the jury, which may add to the legitimacy of verdicts, allowing judges to deliberate with the jurors may improperly influence jurors into making a decision they would not normally make, in deference to the presumed expertise of the judge.  While differences exist in the roles that judges play in Cordoba and Washington, the jurors in each system are entrusted with the same basic responsibilities to be finders of fact and to vote on the guilt or innocence of the accused. [149] 

Another feature that the Cordoban and Washington jury systems may prove to share is the doctrine of jury nullification.  While the fact of jury nullification is alive and well in the Washington jury system, it is difficult to analyze the role that nullification will play in Cordoba since there has only been seven jury trials there to date. [150]  It is plausible that nullification will find its way there since the Cordoban and Washington jury systems are similar in that both allow the jurors to solely determine the guilt or innocence of an accused.  However, jury nullification may prove to be more uncommon in the Cordoban system since it allows two technical judges to vote and deliberate along with the lay jurors, which may influence jurors to follow the law despite their feelings to the contrary.  Of course, the Washington system does not allow a judge to participate in deliberations or to vote on a verdict with the jurors. 

One final difference between the jury systems of Cordoba and Washington is each system's number of peremptory challenges.  Again, Cordoban attorneys are allowed one peremptory challenge per side while their Washington counterparts are usually allowed up to three in civil and misdemeanor cases, six in felonies, and twelve in capital cases. [151]  While allowing attorneys to exercise more peremptory challenges may aid their respective clients, especially if one attorney is better at selecting a jury than his or her counterpart, such a practice may create a jury that is less representative of society because it allows Washington attorneys to dismiss more potential jurors, jurors that may better represent the community instead of jurors who fit their client's specifications.  A final difference is that voire dire under the Cordoban system is very limited, which results in the absence of lengthy voire dire processes.  Both the Cordoban and Washington jury systems have unlimited challenges for cause. [152]       

VII.  Conclusion

"The purpose of trial by jury, as the Supreme Court itself has noted, is to prevent oppression by the government." [153]  Trial by jury is important because it remains a kind of check on the judiciary system, while allowing our peers, people who live and work in our same community, to act as judges instead of people not really connected to the norms of everyday life as a citizen.  Today, it is obvious that many Argentine citizens believed that their own judicial system as not fair and did not appropriately deal with those accused of crime.  As a result, the institution of the jury system in Cordoba remains a seminal event within the Argentine judiciary that is likely to be instituted throughout the rest of the country in the years to come.  While the American and Argentine jury systems are similar in form, differences exist; only time will tell whether the nuances of the Argentine system will be more effective than those found in the American system.  Even though the American jury system has been in existence centuries longer than the Argentine one, both systems could stand to benefit from the observance of each other's jury practices and policies. 

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its Constitution."
-Thomas Jefferson

* The author is a recent graduate of Gonzaga University School of Law, cum laude, who lived in northeast Argentina from 1997-1999.  Many of the materials used for this article, including statues and court transcripts, are in Spanish and were translated by the author into English.  Special thanks to Dr. Jose Antonio Buteler, a former Dean of the University of Cordoba School of Law and current Professor of Law and criminal law practitioner in the Province of Cordoba, Argentina, for providing me with many valuable materials that made this article possible and to Mark Wilson who is a Professor of Law at Gonzaga University School of Law for his many contributions and guidance.

[1] Const. Arg. pt. I, ch. 1, § 24; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 1, ch. 4, § 75; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 3, ch. 2, § 118; Constitución de la Provincia de Cordoba, § 3, ch. 1, art. 162.

[2] Const. Arg. pt. I, ch. 1, § 24; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 1, ch. 4, § 75. 

[3] Comenzo en Cordoba, Clarín (Arg.), Aug. 22, 2005, http://www.clarin.com/diario/2005/08/22/um/m-1038462.htm.

[4] William Shakespeare, The Taming of the Shrew act 5, sc. 1, 1.150, quotation available at http://www.bartelby.com/66/44/52544.html.

[5] Const. Arg. pt. I, ch. 1, § 24; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 1, ch. 4, § 75; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 3, ch. 2, § 118.

[6] Constitución de la Provincia de Cordoba, § 3, ch. 1, art. 162.

[7] Const. Arg. pt. I, ch. 1, § 24; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 1, ch. 4, § 75; Const. Arg. pt. II, tit. I, div. 3, ch. 2, § 118.

[8] Constitución de la Provincia de Cordoba, § 3, ch. 1, art. 162.

[9] Gisela Monge Roffarello, Emilse Monge Roffarello, Ezequiel Trajtenberg & Julio O. Trajtenberg, A Research Guide to the Argentine Legal System, January 2006, http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Argentina.htm (hereinafter Argentine Legal System).

[10] Id.

[11] Juan Carlos Vaca, Jurados Populares: 137 Anos de Prision, La Nacíon (Arg.), May 21, 2006, at p. 28.

[12] Argentine Legal System, supra note 9.

[13] Argentina, The Columbia Encyclopedia (6th ed., Columbia University Press 2001-05), available at http://www.bartleby.com/65/ar/Argentina.html.

[14] Id.

[15] Id.

[16] Id.

[17] Id.

[18] Argentina, supra note 13.

[19] Id.  

[20] Id.

[21] Id.

[22] Id.

[23] Argentina, supra note 13.

[24] Id.

[25] Id.

[26] Juan Carlos Blumberg, Wikipedia, Sept. 26, 2007, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Carlos_Blumberg.

[27] Id.

[28] Thousands Protest Crime Rates in Argentina, The Chechen Times (Russ.), Apr. 23, 2004, available at http://www.chechentimes.org/en/news/?id=16257.

[29] Juan Carlos Blumberg, supra note 26.

[30] Id.

[31] Thousands Protest Crime Rates in Argentina, supra note 28.

[32] Fallo Dividido, Ambitoweb (Arg.), Aug 25, 2005, http://www.ambitoweb.com/seccionesespeciales/suplementos/nacional/noticia.asp?ID=6960.

[33] Id.

[34] Argentine Legal System, supra note 9.

[35] Law No. 9182, art. 57, Jan. 1, 2005, [CDLXXXV] B.O. 27/05/2005.

[36] Id. at art. 1.

[37] Id. at art. 2.

[38] Id. at art. 3.

[39] Id. at art. 2.

[40] See Law No. 9182, supra note 35.

[41] Stephen C. Thaman, Spain Returns to Trial by Jury, 21 Hastings Int'l & Comp. L.Rev. 241, 256-57 (1998).

[42] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 4.

[43] Id.

[44] Id. at art. 5.

[45] Id. at art. 6(a).

[46] Id. at art. 6(b), (c), (h).

[47] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 6(c), (d).

[48] Id. at art. 6(e).

[49] Id. at art. 6(f), (g).

[50] Id. at art. 7.

[51] Id. at art. 7(a).

[52] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art 7(c).

[53] Id. at art. 8.

[54] Id.

[55] Argentina, CIA World Factbook (2007), available at https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ar.html.

[56] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 8.

[57] Id. at art. 9.

[58] Id. at art. 10.

[59] Id. at art. 11.

[60] Id.

[61] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 12.

[62] Id. at art. 13.

[63] Id. at art. 18.

[64] Id.

[65] Id.

[66] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 18.

[67] Id.

[68] Id. at art. 19.

[69] Id.

[70] Id. at art. 20.

[71] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 22.

[72] Id. at art. 23.

[73] Id.

[74] Id. at art. 24.

[75] Id. at art. 27.

[76] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 27.

[77] Id. at art. 29.

[78] Id.

[79] Id.

[80] Id.

[81] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 44.

[82] Id. at art. 34.

[83] Id. at art. 37.

[84] Id. at art. 40.

[85] Id. at art. 30.

[86] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 41.

[87] Id.

[88] Id. at art. 43.

[89] Id. at art. 44.

[90] Id.

[91] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 44.

[92] Id.

[93] Id. at art. 45.

[94] Id. at art. 51.

[95] Id.

[96] Fallo Dividido, supra note 32.

[97] Id.

[98] Transcript of Record at 2, Province of Cordoba v. Luna (Sept. 6, 2005).

[99] Id.

[100] Id.

[101] Id.

[102] Id.

[103] Transcript of Record, supra note 98, at 2.

[104] Id.

[105] Id.

[106] Id.

[107] Id.

[108] Transcript of Record, supra note 98, at 2.

[109] Fallo Dividido, supra note 32.

[110] Id.

[111] Id.

[112] Id.

[113] Id.

[114] Fallo Dividido, supra note 32.

[115] Id.

[116] Comenzo en Cordoba, supra note 3.

[117] Jurados Populares, supra note 11, at 28.

[118] Id.

[119] Id.

[120] Id.

[121] Id.

[122] Jurados Populares, supra note 11, at 28.

[123] Id.

[124] Argentine Legal System, supra note 9.

[125] Fundamentos, Proyecto De Ley (Proyecto De Ley [tr. Law Project] is a report outlining juror procedures and requirements for economic crimes committed within the Province of Cordoba.), ¶ 1.

[126] Id.

[127] Id. at ¶ 8.

[128] Id.

[129] Id.

[130] Fundamentos, supra note 125, at ¶ 9.

[131] Id.

[132] Ernesto Nicolas Kozameh, Nicolas Kozameh Jr., Julio Trajtenberg & Ezequiel Trajtenberg, Guide to the Argentine Executive, Legislative and Judicial System, July 2001,  http://www.llrx.com/features/argentina.htm.

[133]  Ley de Juicio por Jurados, Proyecto de Ley del Senado Argentino [tr. Law Project of the Argentine Senate] is a report commissioned by the Argentine Senate outlining potential juror procedures and requirements for the federal judiciary of Argentina.).

[134] Jurados Populares, supra note 11, at 28.

[135] Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.070 (1988).

[136] Law No. 9181, supra note 35, at art. 38.

[137] Id.

[138] CIA World Factbook, supra note 55.

[139] Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.080 (1979).

[140] Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522, 527 (1975).

[141] Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 40.

[142] CIA World Factbook, supra note 55.

[143] Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.054(2) (1993).

[144] See Argentine Legal System, supra note 9.

[145] Wash. Const. art. I, § XXI; see also Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 2.

[146] Wash. Const. art. I, § XXII.

[147] Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.010(5-7) (1993); see also Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art.4.

[148] Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.010(3) (1993); see also Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at arts. 29, 37.

[149] Wash. Rev. Code § 2.36.010(1)(b) (1993); see also Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 44.

[150] Washington  v. Goines, 113 Wash. App. 723, 726, 54 P.3d 723, 730 (2002).

[151] Wash. Rev. Code § 4.44.130 (1969); see also Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 24; Wash. Sup. Ct. R. 6.4(e)(1) (2000).

[152] Wash. Rev. Code § 4.44.130 (1969); see also Law No. 9182, supra note 35, at art. 23.

[153] Clay S. Conrad, Trial by Jury, Cato Institute, Dec. 19, 1998, http://www.catoorg/dailys/12-09-98.html.