Age Concern New Zealand Media Release – 10 June 2011

What older people are saying about jury service – Age Concern survey results

Age Concern New Zealand asked its SeniorVoice opinion group what they thought of the proposal to allow people aged 65 or over to opt out of jury service.

“Opinions were evenly divided”, says Ann Martin, Chief Executive, Age Concern New Zealand. Those who didn’t react negatively to the change focused on the fact that older people would still have the choice to serve on a jury if they wished :

“Life is easy for some and not for others. Giving people a choice makes sense”

“Since the proposal gives people a choice, I think it a good idea”

“Good on those…who feel ready and able to appear for jury service , but let’s show some respect for those who don’t”

Some also challenged the use of the term “ageism” :

“The legislation may have to do with age, but cannot be viewed as “ageist” because it does not discriminate against the aged”

“If you make it optional, it is not ageism”

Those who took exception to the change were concerned that valuable potential jurors would be lost to “the system”:

“A great deal of common sense would be lost. The 65+ age group will be a virtual majority soon – use it”.

“Almost half the population will soon be over 65. Where will the jurors come from?”

“People over 65 have had time to have a measured view of life, and surely that is needed in the dispensation of justice”.

… and that older people were being encouraged to opt out of an important social function :

“Over-65s also have a responsibility to fulfil their civic duty”.

“People over 65 need to contribute to the wisdom needed by juries. The more seniors are included in general activities in society, the better – this reduces age-related discrimination”.

Some pointed out that exemptions from jury service are currently not difficult to obtain:

“There are plenty of reasons for people to be excused from jury service that could apply to over-65s if they wish to make use of them, but age should not be a criterion”.

Others saw the change as overtly ageist :

“Why is the retirement age being reconsidered if,at age 65, people are not competent to think, analyse, reflect and consider? ... This is a thoroughly ageist view of the competence of older people”.

If you would like to join Age Concern New Zealand’s SeniorVoice opinion group, please visit our website – www.ageconcern.org.nz

© Scoop Media