Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Ett grundlagsskyddat anställningsförhållande – något om ordinarie domare. Om rättsstatliga och etiska förväntningar på domarrollen och om förutsättningarna för straffrättsliga och arbetsrättsliga sanktioner

Stark, Erika LU (2021) JURM02 20211
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The autonomy of the court and the individual judges is of fundamental importance for the rule of law and for a functioning democratic social order. The purpose of this thesis is to describe and analyze the law as it applies to ordinary judges from the perspective of constitutional law and labor law. The method of inquiry is legal dogmatic and legal analytic. The materials used in this thesis are partly from the traditional legal sources and partly from empirical sources in the form of decisions from the Government Disciplinary Board for Higher Officials. The thesis examines how the appointment procedure for appointing judges takes place, what the expectations are for the role of judge, and what constitutes criminal and labor law sanctions... (More)
The autonomy of the court and the individual judges is of fundamental importance for the rule of law and for a functioning democratic social order. The purpose of this thesis is to describe and analyze the law as it applies to ordinary judges from the perspective of constitutional law and labor law. The method of inquiry is legal dogmatic and legal analytic. The materials used in this thesis are partly from the traditional legal sources and partly from empirical sources in the form of decisions from the Government Disciplinary Board for Higher Officials. The thesis examines how the appointment procedure for appointing judges takes place, what the expectations are for the role of judge, and what constitutes criminal and labor law sanctions such as misconduct, disciplinary liability and dismissal.

Decisions on the appointment of judges are made by the government after proposals from the Judges Proposals Board. The assessment may only use objective reasons such as merit and skill in its determination. In order for an applicant to be appointed as an ordinary judge, it is a requirement that a number of eligibility conditions first be met. Judges are employed through sovereign appointment. Therefore, they have a further reaching employment protection according to the law on sovereign appointment and chapter 11 section 7 in the Instrument of Government, than that of the employment protection provided by the Public Employment Act and the Employment Protection Act.

The expectations on the role of judge are determined in part by the states rule of law and in part by the international and national rules of ethics. The rule of law demands that judges must judge independently, impartially and in accordance with the principles of legality, equality and objectivity. The judicial conduct refers, amongst other things, to principles of independence and impartiality and how judges should behave to strengthen public confidence in the court as well as guidelines for exercising the judgeship.

Misconduct made while in the role of judge have consisted of, among other things, unlawful deprivations of liberty and the failure to dispatch judgements within the prescribed time limit as well as decisions on premature preventive detention without legal ground. Recurring circumstances that arise during the assessment are whether any injury or inconvenience has arisen because of the act, the degree of the workload, time pressure and whether measures have been taken to limit the injury.

The types of actions that have resulted in disciplinary liability vary in scope from inappropriate and damaging behavior to incorrect application of law and inadequate processing. In the examination of disciplinary liability, unlawful deprivations of liberty have been common and the workload has been a recurring factor which, in conjunction with other circumstances, has had a limiting effect on the liability. The circumstances that have been regarded in the assessment are similar to those that have been taken into account in the examination of misconduct.

Very few actions in the role of judge have led to dismissal. There is only limited guidance in the legislative history of chapter 11 section 7 in the Instrument of Government and the assessments from the Government Disciplinary Board for Higher Officials are brief. This results in difficulty drawing general conclusions about which actions as a judge that result in dismissal. The majority of the situations that have been assessed by the board have been of criminal nature. Established practice shows that every form of offense or crime of a less serious nature should not result in dismissal. Occasional fines, drunk driving offenses or acts that can be considered to be singular events do not constitute sufficient grounds for dismissal. On the other hand, repeated offenses have led to dismissal. Despite the ambiguity in how chapter 11 section 7 in the Instrument of Government is to be interpreted, the employee protection for judges appear to be strong. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Domstolarnas och de enskilda domarnas självständighet och oberoende är av grundläggande betydelse för rättsstaten och för ett fungerande demokratiskt samhällsskick. Syftet med uppsatsen är att beskriva och analysera gällande rätt om ordinarie domares arbete ur konstitutionellt och arbetsrättsligt perspektiv. Metoden är rättsdogmatisk och rättsanalytisk. Materialet som används är dels de traditionella rättskällorna, dels empiriskt material i form av underrättsavgöranden från Statens ansvarsnämnd. Uppsatsen undersöker hur utnämningsförfarandet för ordinarie domare går till, vilka förväntningar som finns på domarrollen samt vilka ageranden som medför straffrättsliga och arbetsrättsliga sanktioner i form av tjänstefel, disciplinansvar och... (More)
Domstolarnas och de enskilda domarnas självständighet och oberoende är av grundläggande betydelse för rättsstaten och för ett fungerande demokratiskt samhällsskick. Syftet med uppsatsen är att beskriva och analysera gällande rätt om ordinarie domares arbete ur konstitutionellt och arbetsrättsligt perspektiv. Metoden är rättsdogmatisk och rättsanalytisk. Materialet som används är dels de traditionella rättskällorna, dels empiriskt material i form av underrättsavgöranden från Statens ansvarsnämnd. Uppsatsen undersöker hur utnämningsförfarandet för ordinarie domare går till, vilka förväntningar som finns på domarrollen samt vilka ageranden som medför straffrättsliga och arbetsrättsliga sanktioner i form av tjänstefel, disciplinansvar och avskedande.

Beslut om utnämning av ordinarie domare fattas av regeringen efter förslag från Domarnämnden. Vid bedömningen får endast sakliga grunder såsom förtjänst och skicklighet beaktas. För att en sökande ska kunna utnämnas till ordinarie domare krävs det att ett antal behörighetsvillkor är uppfyllda. Ordinarie domare anställs med fullmakt och åtnjuter ett mer långtgående anställningsskydd enligt LFA och 11 kap. 7 § RF än det som följer av LOA och LAS.

Förväntningarna på domarrollen utgörs dels av rättsstatliga förväntningar, dels av internationella och nationella etiska regler. De rättsstatliga förväntningarna ställer krav på att domare ska döma självständigt, oberoende och opartiskt samt i enlighet med legalitetsprincipen, likhetsprincipen och objektivitetsprincipen. De domaretiska reglerna avser bland annat principer om oberoende och opartiskhet, hur domare ska uppträda för att förstärka allmänhetens förtroende samt riktlinjer för utövandet av domarämbetet.

Tjänstefel i domarrollen har bland annat utgjorts av felaktiga frihetsberövanden, underlåtenhet att expediera avkunnade domar inom föreskriven tid och beslut om omhändertagande i förtid utan laglig grund. Omständigheter som har varit återkommande vid bedömningen är om någon skada eller olägenhet har uppkommit till följd av gärningen, graden av arbetsbelastning, tidspress och om åtgärder har vidtagits för att begränsa skadan.

Vilka typer av ageranden som har medfört disciplinansvar varierar från olämpliga och förtroendeskadliga uppträdanden till oriktig rättstillämpning och bristande handläggning. Vid prövningen av disciplinansvar har felaktiga frihetsberövanden varit vanligt förekommande och arbetsbelastningen har varit en återkommande faktor som, i kombination med andra omständigheter, verkat ansvarsinskränkande. De omständigheter som har beaktats vid bedömningen liknar de som har beaktats vid prövningen av tjänstefel.

Ytterst få ageranden i domarrollen har medfört avskedande. Förarbetena till 11 kap. 7 § RF innehåller begränsad vägledning avseende tolkningen av bestämmelsen och ansvarsnämndens bedömningar är kortfattade. Detta resulterar i svårigheter att dra generella slutsatser om vilka ageranden i domarrollen som föranleder avskedande. Majoriteten av de situationer som prövats av nämnden har avsett handlingar av brottslig karaktär. Av praxis framgår att varje form av förseelse eller brott av mindre allvarlig art inte ska medföra avskedande. Enstaka bötesbrott, rattfylleribrott eller gärningar som kan betraktas som engångsföreteelser har inte utgjort tillräcklig grund för avskedande. Däremot har återfall i brottslighet medfört avskedande. Trots otydligheten avseende tolkningen av 11 kap. 7 § RF framstår anställningsskyddet för ordinarie domare som starkt. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Stark, Erika LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
A constitutionally protected employment – in regards to judges. On the rule of law and ethical expectations of the judges role and the conditions for criminal and labour law sanctions
course
JURM02 20211
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt, ordinarie domare, anställningsskydd, fullmaktsanställning, utnämning, avskedande, disciplinansvar, tjänstefel, etiska regler, rättsstatliga förväntningar, labour law, employment protection, ordinary judge
language
Swedish
id
9046171
date added to LUP
2021-06-09 11:02:02
date last changed
2021-06-09 11:02:02
@misc{9046171,
  abstract     = {{The autonomy of the court and the individual judges is of fundamental importance for the rule of law and for a functioning democratic social order. The purpose of this thesis is to describe and analyze the law as it applies to ordinary judges from the perspective of constitutional law and labor law. The method of inquiry is legal dogmatic and legal analytic. The materials used in this thesis are partly from the traditional legal sources and partly from empirical sources in the form of decisions from the Government Disciplinary Board for Higher Officials. The thesis examines how the appointment procedure for appointing judges takes place, what the expectations are for the role of judge, and what constitutes criminal and labor law sanctions such as misconduct, disciplinary liability and dismissal. 

Decisions on the appointment of judges are made by the government after proposals from the Judges Proposals Board. The assessment may only use objective reasons such as merit and skill in its determination. In order for an applicant to be appointed as an ordinary judge, it is a requirement that a number of eligibility conditions first be met. Judges are employed through sovereign appointment. Therefore, they have a further reaching employment protection according to the law on sovereign appointment and chapter 11 section 7 in the Instrument of Government, than that of the employment protection provided by the Public Employment Act and the Employment Protection Act. 

The expectations on the role of judge are determined in part by the states rule of law and in part by the international and national rules of ethics. The rule of law demands that judges must judge independently, impartially and in accordance with the principles of legality, equality and objectivity. The judicial conduct refers, amongst other things, to principles of independence and impartiality and how judges should behave to strengthen public confidence in the court as well as guidelines for exercising the judgeship.

Misconduct made while in the role of judge have consisted of, among other things, unlawful deprivations of liberty and the failure to dispatch judgements within the prescribed time limit as well as decisions on premature preventive detention without legal ground. Recurring circumstances that arise during the assessment are whether any injury or inconvenience has arisen because of the act, the degree of the workload, time pressure and whether measures have been taken to limit the injury.

The types of actions that have resulted in disciplinary liability vary in scope from inappropriate and damaging behavior to incorrect application of law and inadequate processing. In the examination of disciplinary liability, unlawful deprivations of liberty have been common and the workload has been a recurring factor which, in conjunction with other circumstances, has had a limiting effect on the liability. The circumstances that have been regarded in the assessment are similar to those that have been taken into account in the examination of misconduct. 

Very few actions in the role of judge have led to dismissal. There is only limited guidance in the legislative history of chapter 11 section 7 in the Instrument of Government and the assessments from the Government Disciplinary Board for Higher Officials are brief. This results in difficulty drawing general conclusions about which actions as a judge that result in dismissal. The majority of the situations that have been assessed by the board have been of criminal nature. Established practice shows that every form of offense or crime of a less serious nature should not result in dismissal. Occasional fines, drunk driving offenses or acts that can be considered to be singular events do not constitute sufficient grounds for dismissal. On the other hand, repeated offenses have led to dismissal. Despite the ambiguity in how chapter 11 section 7 in the Instrument of Government is to be interpreted, the employee protection for judges appear to be strong.}},
  author       = {{Stark, Erika}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Ett grundlagsskyddat anställningsförhållande – något om ordinarie domare. Om rättsstatliga och etiska förväntningar på domarrollen och om förutsättningarna för straffrättsliga och arbetsrättsliga sanktioner}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}