Coronavirus: Emergency laws that removed defendants' rights to a trial by jury ditched

Under the laws passed in April, a judge could force a defendant to face a judge-alone trial, even if they objected.

It caused anger among legal groups, who said it took away a fundamental right of all Australians.

But Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay at the time said it would ensure justice was not delayed.

The validity of the laws was due to be tested in the High Court in June, by a person ordered to face a judge-alone trial.

However the case was returned to the Supreme Court where ACT Judge Michael Elkaim allowed the trial in question to go ahead before a judge and jury.

The decision came after an order from the Chief Justice to allow some jury trials to proceed.

"The court has been informed by an independent expert that jury trials, subject to certain restrictions, may be safely conducted," he said in allowing a jury trial.

"I am therefore of the view that it would be appropriate for me to reconsider my earlier conclusion and to permit this matter to proceed by way of a jury trial."

On Thursday, the Legislative Assembly passed amendments that removed the ability to force defendants to have judge-alone trials. Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said the emergency legislation was brought in when it was understood there could be no jury trials in the ACT for months.

However, as some jury trials could now proceed safely, he said the laws were no longer required.

"The cessation of jury trials in April put in place by the courts occurred to protect the public, court staff and the legal profession," his spokesman said.

"The temporary amendments to the Supreme Court Act ensured the administration of justice could continue during the COVID-19 pandemic."

"The Supreme Court has announced the resumption of some jury trials in mid-June.

"The government commends the work of the court in being able to do this in a way which meets the requirements for their safe operation."

Judge alone trials for serious offences covered under the act will still be able to proceed provided the accused agrees to this occurring.

While other jurisdictions moved to allow more judge-alone trials, not other proposed to do so without a defendant's permission.

The ACT Law Society was among the vocal opponents to the laws.

The chair of the society's criminal law committee, Michael Kukulies-Smith, said the new provision was "fundamentally unsound and misguided".

"The right to trial by jury is a significant, longstanding right in our legal system that has been consistently observed by the High Court of Australia," Mr Kukulies-Smith said.

"It is a fundamental tenet of the rule of law, and has been enshrined in legal systems since before Magna Carta."