Since 1994, South Africa has become a non-racial, constitutional state based on universally accepted democratic precepts, in which the Black majority controls the government. The principle of lay participation was largely inherited from England. The exclusion of all persons except Whites as jurors everywhere in a racially divided society led to the gradual abandonment and demise of the jury system in 1969. The reintroduction of lay participation occurred during the last days of apartheid through the use of lay assessors in the lower courts. This was done in an attempt to involve the Black majority in the all-White court system that was seen by many as illegitimate and unrepresentative. In the new democratic the use of lay assessors in the lower courts has been retained and extended. But the jury system has no future or prospect of reintroduction under the prevailing conditions in South Africa. There is a combination of factors that provide a disincentive to the restoration of the jury system in either the High Court or lower courts of South Africa. One factor is the multi-ethnic and multi-cultural nature of the society, giving it a heterogeneity that is likely to be at odds with the concept of a “trial by one’s peers.” Another factor is the existence of 11 different official languages that are often used by members of different communities living in the same area. Another factor is that the cost of providing juries could well prove prohibitive. The judges and magistrates are resistant to the principle of lay participation because of the long-standing professionalism of the court system in criminal matters and the unfavorable reputation of the previous jury system. There is a widely held perception that the jury system is inappropriate in the computer age, where fraud and other white collar crimes raise complex issues and take up months of court time. 48 footnotes