The magistrates of England and Wales are a unique legal decision-making group, compared with lay decision-makers in other parts of the world. They differ from juries (such as criminal juries in the USA) and they differ from lay assessors in mixed courts (such as the Schöffengericht at the German lower criminal court). For example, they acquire much more court experience. The prestige of the office also differs fundamentally: being a US juror is not perceived as a special honour. German lay assessors (Schöffen) may feel a sense of honour for being selected. But being a magistrate (“Justice of the Peace”) is more clearly a highly esteemed position in English and Welsh society.
The magistrates essentially are the court: because they are the decision-makers. So they can develop a feeling of belonging to their bench, whereas it is difficult for Schöffen and impossible for jurors to develop a feeling of belonging to the court.
The decision-making powers given to the three types of lay decision makers vary considerably. German lay assessors have the same rights as the professional judge in a running court hearing and are involved in all decisions here, but they are not involved in the pretrial phase. The magistrates take pretrial decisions, and they have comprehensive powers in the main hearing. The US jury typically only hears the evidence the judge permits and the prosecutor and defense attorney present in arguing their cases. To summarize, these are three very different forms of lay participation and the magistrates in England and Wales wield the most power in the cases they handle.