On 3 December 2025, I introduced the Juries (Peremptory Challenges) Amendment Bill 2025 to the ACT Legislative Assembly. This Bill proposes reducing the number of peremptory challenges available in jury trials, helping to strengthen fairness, improve diversity, and enhance public confidence in our justice system.
Below you will find a set of FAQs and useful links to help explain the Bill and its purpose in more detail.
What is the Bill?
The Juries (Peremptory Challenges) Amendment Bill 2025 proposes reducing the number of peremptory challenges available to both the Defence and the Prosecution during the jury selection process in the ACT.
For a standard 12‑person jury, the number of peremptory challenges will be reduced from eight to four for each party. Proportional reductions will apply for other jury sizes.
This change brings the ACT more in line with other Australian jurisdictions. For example, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia each allow three peremptory challenges.
The purpose of the Bill is to improve the representativeness of juries and to reduce the time and cost involved in empanelling them.
What is a peremptory challenge?
There are two types of challenges that parties can make during jury selection:
1. Challenge for cause (unchanged by the Bill) A challenge for cause requires a party to give a valid and justifiable reason why a potential juror should not serve. These challenges remain unlimited and are subject to judicial oversight. They are a key safeguard for a fair trial because they address genuine risks of bias or impartiality grounded in evidence or fact.
2. Peremptory challenge (the focus of the Bill) A peremptory challenge allows a party to exclude a potential juror without providing any reason. While originally intended to help both sides ensure impartiality, in practice they are frequently based on observable characteristics such as apparent age, gender, ethnicity or disability.
Because peremptory challenges do not require justification, they can be used in a way that reduces the diversity and representativeness of juries. A Victorian study found that in 2018–19, 70% of peremptory challenges were used against women, resulting in juries that were less representative of the community.
The Bill maintains the ability to use peremptory challenges. For example, to address concerning behaviour (such as glaring at the accused or reacting emotionally to charges) while reducing their number to limit discriminatory or arbitrary use.
Why do we need it?
High numbers of peremptory challenges can undermine both fairness and efficiency in the justice system.
To improve fairness and representativeness Peremptory challenges are often used based on assumptions about visible characteristics. This can result in juries that do not reflect the community, and may disproportionately exclude women, people from culturally diverse backgrounds, or people with disabilities.
A more representative jury enhances public confidence, perceived fairness, and actual fairness in criminal trials.
2. To reduce time, stress and cost Large numbers of peremptory challenges can significantly prolong the process of jury empanelment. This leads to:
Longer delays for criminal trials
Greater stress for potential jurors
Higher administrative and legal costs for courts, prosecution, defence and Legal Aid
Impacts on employers and self‑employed jurors due to longer periods away from work
In extreme cases, hundreds or even thousands of potential jurors have had to be summoned to seat a single jury. This was seen in the 2009 terrorism trial of Abdul Benbrika and associates, where more than 1,000 citizens attended court over two days.
By reducing the number of peremptory challenges, trials can proceed more quickly and efficiently, without compromising fairness.
What happens now?
The Bill was introduced to the ACT Legislative Assembly on 3 December 2025.
The debate has been adjourned and will return to the Assembly for consideration later in 2026. The Standing Committee on Legal Affairs has resolved not to conduct an inquiry into the Bill, meaning it will proceed directly to debate in the Assembly.
If the Bill is passed:
The ACT will be brought closer to alignment with other Australian jurisdictions.
The number of peremptory challenges will be reduced, but:
The right to a jury trial remains unchanged.
The right to unlimited challenges for cause remains unchanged, preserving essential safeguards for a fair trial.
Overall, the Bill aims to strengthen public trust, improve fairness in jury selection, and ensure a more efficient and representative justice system.
