A Victorian defence lawyer is still pushing for changes to rules to ensure unvaccinated people can't serve on juries.
Victoria's Juries Commissioner was granted the right to ask people called for jury service for proof of vaccination under amended legislation that passed state parliament on Thursday.
But a defence lawyer has told the state's Court of Appeal that there's no way of knowing if the discretion will be applied and if anyone will be told that it has.
And he believes a person standing trial might not have confidence that a jury, who may be worried about the vaccination status of their fellow jurors, will consider their case in an unbiased and undistracted way.
The lawyer, who cannot be identified for fear of prejudicing a trial that's about to begin in regional Victoria, raised the issue with a County Court judge this week.
He requested the judge question jurors about their vaccination status "with a view to facilitating a double vaccinated jury" or that they be allowed to challenge potential jurors whose vaccination status is unknown.
But the judge refused both, saying they had no authorisation to do so.
The lawyer requested the Court of Appeal consider the position, but the judges on Friday questioned whether it mattered anymore given legislation had passed in the interim.
The amendment gives the commissioner the power to defer a person from serving on a jury for health, safety or welfare reasons - including their COVID-19 vaccination status.
Those unable to prove they're vaccinated may be deferred. The power applies until October 2022.
One judge suggested that for them to weigh in would be a purely academic exercise.
But the defence lawyer disagreed.
"There is no clarity, in my submission, that the power will be exercised by the juries commissioner," he said.
"Even if it were to be exercised, that information is not readily apparent to any person due to stand trial."
The judges said they expected those in court would be told that the power had been exercised and that all jurors were vaccinated.
It's hoped that will be done in the next County Court hearing next week.
The judges have adjourned the discussion until after that hearing.
