The self-employed lobbyist is one of two deaf people taking part in a ground-breaking trial investigating the feasibility of deaf citizens serving on juries.

Previous research has found deaf jurors are not disadvantaged by relying on sign language interpreters, showing comparable levels of understanding to other jurors. The mock trial is the first project to examine the impact of having an interpreter in the jury room, and whether it affects the dynamic and communications between jurors.

NSW legislation does not directly exclude deaf people from jury service, only those who are ‘‘unable, because of sickness, infirmity or disability, to discharge the duties of a juror’’. But no deaf person has sat on a trial jury in Australia.

A NSW Law Reform Commission review recommended in 2006 that blind or deaf people not be excluded from jury service on the basis of their disability alone, and that interpreters or stenographers assisting them should be permitted in the jury room during deliberations as long as they complied with the requirements of jury secrecy.

In May, a deaf woman was barred from serving on a Queensland jury on the basis it would introduce an Auslan interpreter as a ‘‘13th juror’’ into deliberations.

But Sandra Hale, professor of interpreting and translation at the University of NSW, said professional sign language interpreters were bound by a strict code of ethics that ensured confidentiality. ‘‘In the [jury room] they would be interpreting and not contributing anything extra – they wouldn't become an extra juror,’’ she said.

Professor Hale is leading the project with researchers including professors David Spencer from the Australian Catholic University and Jemina Napier, from Heriot-Watt University in the UK.

During the two-day mock trial, which is based on a real criminal case, two Auslan interpreters will translate courtroom proceedings for the deaf jurors before entering the jury room, where interactions will be filmed and analysed.

The trial judge, retired District Court judge Chris Geraghty, told the jury the interpreters were ‘‘simply a cipher, an instrument’’ to translate what was said in court and the jury room.

Alex Jones said participating in jury duty was a basic human right for people with disabilities. Excluding them was ‘‘like saying you are not ‘good enough’ to make decisions or have a say in the justice system, but anyone from the street can’’, he said.

‘‘The power of the jury relies on each person's journey in life, perspectives, values and beliefs,’’ he said. ‘‘I can assure you that people with disabilities are able to contribute as much as any other juror.’’