Jury eligibility question help.

[Noi]

Hello, I recently got assigned this task to do:

Answer the following question:

“The House of Lords in the case of R v Abdroikov and others undermined the main purpose behind the reforms to eligibility for jury service contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The whole point behind the reforms was to ensure that juries represent a greater cross-section of English society and this would include those involved in the administration of justice.”

Critically consider whether you agree with the above statement in light of:

a) The role of the jury in a criminal trial;
b) Relevant case law concerning problems experienced with eligibility and perverse verdicts in jury trials;
c) The reforms and proposals for further reforms concerning jury eligibility that have been made since 1965.


I think I know what the question is asking me about: Asking me if the House of Lords in the case R v Abdroikov contradicts/hinders with the reforms(which was that the allowed people from occupations who were ineligible to be on the jury panel before the CJA 2003).

Which I need to say if I agree with that or not.
But I'm confused as to how to answer this question:

Do I need to say how they undermined the main purpose of the reforms? And how they didn't in that case? Because I'm not sure what points to make (would be helpful if someone gave me a hint)
Or do I just follow the (a) (b) and (c) given after the question?

The case R v Abdroikov and others is basically: 3 appellants (N, G, and W) who have been convicted on unrelated offences. However, they all appealed on the basis that serving police offers and a CPS solicitor were members of the juries meaning they had been deprived of a fair trial. Two out of three appeals to the House of Lords was allowed as one jury panel contained a police officer and the other contained a CPS lawyer


Would really appreciate it if you could give me a hint/advice on how to tackle this question.

Thanks,

[NotMyRealName09]

The key to a successful biscuit is to use the cup shape of your hand to spread your cheeks so that you have a mostly concave semi sphere in which to deposit your fart, so that as you draw it quickly up to your nose post release the shape acts somewhat as a sail (in reverse of course), capturing your wind in your sail until you can fully inhale and judge - nay - appreciate, your own unique take on your brand. In contrast to the rower who uses his paddle to push against the tide and leave behind the past, the biscuit aficionado unitizes his his own paddle not to push against, but welcome the reminder of what was, with its full spectrum of memory of joys, and tears, that went into creating that brief moment of reminiscent effluence. None of us is free of reminders of our past, and the better of us learn to embrace them, good and bad, for they make up the full and varied experiences of life well lived.