Nico van Rooyen, left frustrated after a three day wait for jury service at the Manukau District Court, says the system needs an overhaul. Photo: Dean Purcell
Nico van Rooyen was stoked to get called for jury service, only to be left deflated and out of pocket after the experience..
The 57-year-old Auckland manager who works for a “very busy outfit” said he was called for jury service for the first time in 2025.
“I was very excited; I even booked leave and told everybody about it.”
But, the excitement soon turned to frustration when he spent three days waiting at the Manukau District Court, only to be told he had been released from jury duty.
“Not a single one of my friends or customers had anything good to say about it (jury service), some said, just make an excuse for work, some had been excused from it between three and seven times, but not me mate; I wanted to do it.
“I am a South African, having been in New Zealand for 25 years, and (recently) I got my citizen certificate.
“I won’t ever do it again, believe you me, it’s the biggest waste of time I have ever experienced; the selection process is a farce of gigantic proportions.”
van Rooyen said 80 people waited at the Manukau District Court for several hours, and then, without any scrutiny, were reduced to 40 by order of ballot in a box.
He said he was then told to return to the court the following morning. He turned up again and waited all day, again told to come back the following morning.
He returned on the third day and was released just after 12 noon.
“This is taxpayer money, parking gets reimbursed, and jurors get $31 for a half day and $62 for a full day.
“This is just the Manukau court, New Zealand has 58 courts.”
After doing some rough maths, van Rooyen said the dollar figures “became mind-boggling” as he questioned how much the government could save by revamping the jury system.
“I think the system needs an overhaul, this is not civic duty, this is civic punishment and tax wastage of the top order.”
van Rooyen said he wouldn’t claim any money for the three days as he just wanted to put the experience behind him.
He said the experience had cost his company time and money.
“The impact to the company I work for was significant as I manage several sites in Auckland. I am a very busy man every day.
“It took me over three days to play catch up on the lost time, and no overtime as I am on salary, not wages.
“I spent three evenings working late to help with the backlog of work the jury service had created.”
Official Information Act figures supplied to NZME by the Ministry of Justice show $7,138,000 was paid in fees and expenses to potential jurors who attended jury service in New Zealand in 2024.
The ministry was unable to identify how many of those people were selected for a jury.
Comparative figures for the previous four years showed total fees and expenses had increased from $3.9m to $5.2m in 2021, $5.69m in 2022, and $7m in 2023.
The number of juror summonses climbed from 144,093 in 2020 to 273,649 in 2021, 212,408 in 2022, to 214,356 in 2023, before dipping to 201,613 in 2024.
Acting Ministry of Justice courts and justice services policy acting general manager Megan Noyce acknowledged van Rooyen’s concerns and apologised.
“The ministry appreciates the effort and contribution members of the public make when serving on juries, as it is a crucial part of our justice system. It is an important civic jury, and the right to a fair trial depends on this commitment.”
Noyce said the Regulatory Systems (Courts) Amendment Bill included two amendments aimed at making the jury selection process more efficient. The Justice Committee has examined it and recommends it be passed.
The first amendment would enable summonsed jurors to attend court only when required by the court. It would allow multiple jury panels to be convened in a week - one for each trial - instead of all jurors summoned for that week attending every day.
Noyce said the change would “improve court efficiency and juror attendance”.
The second would allow the first part of jury selection to take place outside the court precinct, or electronically.
“This bill will enable electronic balloting to be introduced in the future. Once implemented, only jurors selected in the ballot would need to attend court, while the remainder would only need to attend if they’re selected for another trial during that week.”
The bill is at the second reading stage.
Noyce also referenced a recent Ministry of Justice Juror Satisfaction Survey report.
“The annual survey gathers valuable feedback from jurors on various aspects of their jury duty experience, helping to inform key decisions to improve court services and ensuring that future jurors have a more efficient and comfortable experience.”
Chief Victims Advisor to the government Ruth Money said she had already flagged concerns about jury service with Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith.
Money said she had questioned whether juries were still relevant for some offences.
“Is the jury system working at its best to ensure they are best reflection of the community? I think there should be a review of the jury system; the Ministry of Justice operations should review current fees.”
Money said Denmark and Germany were case examples of jurisdictions where experts were empanelled instead of juries. She said it could work in New Zealand with certain types of offences, specifically sexual and family violence matters.
“This is not new, there have been a number of people looking at it.”
Money said she did still see the importance of juries within the justice system.
“Juries are really important in our justice system, but are we looking at them in terms of $31 for a half day, if someone can’t get childcare, are we excluding certain populations?
“We should be paying people more, again, a problem, where do you get the money from?”
Money acknowledged the current system was not efficient, lengthy and “fairly manual”.
“I think the Ministry of Justice should be going to the Justice Minister with some advice, they could undertake a review.”
Money said she understood the courts were “full” of an expanding “complexity” of cases. “Again, if the cases are complex, is there a need for a jury or a more effective and efficient solution?”
“I would encourage a review, so it is less clumsy, there is a lot of weight from other jurisdictions and the appropriateness of juries.”
Al Williams is an Open Justice reporter for the New Zealand Herald, based in Christchurch. He has worked in daily and community titles in New Zealand and overseas for the last 16 years. Most recently he was editor of the Hauraki-Coromandel Post, based in Whangamatā. He was previously deputy editor of the Cook Islands News.