at abolishing the jury system for some trials.

Bermuda Bar Association president Narinder Hargun said any move towards a three-judge panel instead of a jury for crimes involving drugs and violence would have to looked at very carefully.

And lawyer and PLP Parliamentary candidate turned Independent Philip Perinchief said getting rid of juries was an attack on democratic rights.

Mr. Hargun said: "I haven't considered this in any detail -- but trial by jury is guaranteed under the Constitution and it would need a change to the Constitution.

"One would have to look at it very carefully -- these are fundamental changes.

"Trial by jury is one of the fundamental rights in any Commonwealth jurisdiction and Bermuda.'' Mr. Hargun stressed he would need to see full details of any proposed changes before taking a definitive position.

He said: "Government have said they're going to investigate it and we would have to look at it during that investigation. The Bar Association would want to make a contribution to this.'' Mr. Hargun added he had yet to canvass opinion among the members of the legal `trade union.' But he said: "There is no doubt people hold very strong views in relation to this issue and there would have to be compelling reasons for a change.'' Government's recent five-plan said it intended to take a look at changes in the legal structure.

The move comes amid concern that the Island's juries are prone to handing down `not guilty' verdicts -- especially in drugs cases and sometimes, it has been claimed, against the weight of evidence.

But Mr. Hargun said: "There could be all sorts of other reasons why there is a high acquittal rate -- including innocence and the the way a case is presented.

"The assumption that acquittal rate is due to juries needs serious consideration. Put another way, there's no guarantee the acquittal rate would be lower if there was a three-judge panel.'' Mr. Hargun was backed by defence counsel Mr. Perinchief.

He said Attorney General Elliott Mottley had said axing juries was unconstitutional.

It is understood, however, legal advice sought by the UBP suggests otherwise, and the party has not ruled out altering the Constitution if needed.

But Mr. Perinchief said: "When you begin to go down that path you are taking a strike against democracy.

"You're removing the public's right to be tried by their peers. We already have a three-man panel for appeals and that's sufficient.

"When people say that there are too many acquittals they are casting aspersions on our jury pool. It may well be that there are too many charges brought. I think a move towards the abolition of juries represents a right-wing shift in the executive arm of Government'' And Mr. Perinchief predicted a three-judge panel would be viewed by the public as "prosecutorial and biased.'' He added: "It would be seen that the three-judge system was set up to replace juries because juries are giving too many acquittals. But it's wrong to say that there should be more convictions and its a crass insult to the jury system.'' But Mr. Perinchief said he would like to see "a total revamp'' of the Legal Aid system -- including the creation of a US-style public defender system.

He added: "There is also a total imbalance in favour of the prosecution as they're allowed to stand down the entire jury while the defence has only three choices.''