Judge and no jury

The justice system has managed to rid itself of that pesky thing called the jury. The BBC reports that the top judge, 'Lord Chief Justice' aka. the bloke in the dress and wig has ruled that its ok for a trial to go ahead without a jury.

I do understand the arguement that it would be costly or time consuming, and jurors often not the best qualified people to make sense of complicated evidence, but if you remove that fundemental pillar of the judicial system then why have a judicial system at all?

One of the main reasons why having a judge ruling on a case without a jury to keep them in check is that the judge is just a glorified government bureaucrat. Afterall he is on the payroll of the government, so he utimately answers to them. Another reason is that the jury can exercise the right to question the law itself, which is known as jury nullification. There has been periods in history where jury nullification has set a precedent for the law itself to be changed, e.g. like slavery. Its another weapon the citizen has which has been snatched from their grip.