Lekmannadomare i Sverige och Norge - en komparativ analys
(2021) LAGF03 20211Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Lekmannadomare har en viktig roll i såväl det svenska som norska
rättsväsendet. I båda länderna har användandet av lekmannadomare
en lång historisk bakgrund. Lekmannadomares roll har skiftat över
tiden i båda länderna. I nutid finns stora likheter mellan
nämndemannasystemen i Sverige och Norge. Det finns dock skillnader
som är värda att belysa och analysera. Den här uppsatsen syftar till att
klargöra hur lekmannadomarnas roll utvecklats historiskt i Sverige och
Norge samt att analysera de skillnader som finns idag. Uppsatsen syftar
vidare till att undersöka argument för respektive emot att
lekmannadomare även framledes deltar i brottmålsprocesser.
I Norge förekom lekmannadomare fram till 2018 både i form av jury
och... (More) - Lekmannadomare har en viktig roll i såväl det svenska som norska
rättsväsendet. I båda länderna har användandet av lekmannadomare
en lång historisk bakgrund. Lekmannadomares roll har skiftat över
tiden i båda länderna. I nutid finns stora likheter mellan
nämndemannasystemen i Sverige och Norge. Det finns dock skillnader
som är värda att belysa och analysera. Den här uppsatsen syftar till att
klargöra hur lekmannadomarnas roll utvecklats historiskt i Sverige och
Norge samt att analysera de skillnader som finns idag. Uppsatsen syftar
vidare till att undersöka argument för respektive emot att
lekmannadomare även framledes deltar i brottmålsprocesser.
I Norge förekom lekmannadomare fram till 2018 både i form av jury
och som meddomare. Sedan avskaffandet av juryn 2018 är det norska
nämndemannasystemet mer likt det svenska men skillnader finns
fortfarande.
I Sverige deltar lekmannadomare i egenskap av nämndemän och som
jurymedlemmar i tryckfrihetsmål. Svenska nämndemän utses av de
politiska partierna i kommunfullmäktige. Det faktum att politiska
partier utser nämndemän har varit kritiserat och många menar att det
riskerar leda till politisering och äventyrad rättssäkerhet. Risken för
politisering, tappat förtroende bland allmänheten och bristen på
juridisk utbildning utgör några av argumenteten mot att framledes ha
kvar lekmannadomare i brottmålsprocesser. Argument till stöd för
nämndemäns fortsatta medverkan är bl.a. att det utgör en spärr mot
teknokratisk rättstillämpning och att den medborgliga insynen och
kontrollen är viktig i en demokratisk rättsstat. Norge avskaffade som
ovan nämnt juryn i andra instans 2018. I Sverige har ingen förändring
skett på lång tid. (Less) - Abstract
- Lay judges have an important role in both the Swedish and Norwegian legal system. The use of lay judges has a long historical background in Scandinavia. Nowadays, the role of lay judges in Sweden and Norway are very similar. However, there are some differences that are worth highlighting and analyzing. This essay aims to clarify how the role of lay judges have developed in both countries from a historical perspective. It also aims to analyze the similarities and differences that exists today. Another aim of this essay is to examine and discuss arguments both for and against the further use of lay judges in criminal proceedings.
Up until 2018 lay judges were active in the Norwegian legal system both as jury members in the second... (More) - Lay judges have an important role in both the Swedish and Norwegian legal system. The use of lay judges has a long historical background in Scandinavia. Nowadays, the role of lay judges in Sweden and Norway are very similar. However, there are some differences that are worth highlighting and analyzing. This essay aims to clarify how the role of lay judges have developed in both countries from a historical perspective. It also aims to analyze the similarities and differences that exists today. Another aim of this essay is to examine and discuss arguments both for and against the further use of lay judges in criminal proceedings.
Up until 2018 lay judges were active in the Norwegian legal system both as jury members in the second instance and as co-judges, meddommer. Since the use of jury in the second instance was abolished by the Norwegian parliament during 2017 the role of Norwegian lay judges is more similar to their Swedish counterparts.
In Sweden, lay judges occur primarily in the form of nämndemän which are co-judges equivalent to the Norwegian meddommer. The Swedish lay judges are appointed by the political parties that are represented in the municipal council. The fact that political parties appoint the Swedish lay judges have been heavily criticized. Some of the critics are based on the belief that the current way of appointing lay judges’ risks leading to politicization of the courts and jeopardizing of the public trust to the judicial system. Arguments that support the current use of lay judges are for example that their participation constitutes a protection against technocratic application of the law.
As mentioned above, Norway abolished the jury in the second instance 2017. In Sweden has no major change when it comes to the use of lay judges in criminal proceedings taken place in a long time. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9045678
- author
- Hertel, Carl LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20211
- year
- 2021
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Lekmannadomare, nämndemän, komparativ rätt, lay judges, processrätt, criminal procedure, comparative law
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9045678
- date added to LUP
- 2021-08-16 13:03:01
- date last changed
- 2021-08-16 13:03:01
@misc{9045678, abstract = {{Lay judges have an important role in both the Swedish and Norwegian legal system. The use of lay judges has a long historical background in Scandinavia. Nowadays, the role of lay judges in Sweden and Norway are very similar. However, there are some differences that are worth highlighting and analyzing. This essay aims to clarify how the role of lay judges have developed in both countries from a historical perspective. It also aims to analyze the similarities and differences that exists today. Another aim of this essay is to examine and discuss arguments both for and against the further use of lay judges in criminal proceedings. Up until 2018 lay judges were active in the Norwegian legal system both as jury members in the second instance and as co-judges, meddommer. Since the use of jury in the second instance was abolished by the Norwegian parliament during 2017 the role of Norwegian lay judges is more similar to their Swedish counterparts. In Sweden, lay judges occur primarily in the form of nämndemän which are co-judges equivalent to the Norwegian meddommer. The Swedish lay judges are appointed by the political parties that are represented in the municipal council. The fact that political parties appoint the Swedish lay judges have been heavily criticized. Some of the critics are based on the belief that the current way of appointing lay judges’ risks leading to politicization of the courts and jeopardizing of the public trust to the judicial system. Arguments that support the current use of lay judges are for example that their participation constitutes a protection against technocratic application of the law. As mentioned above, Norway abolished the jury in the second instance 2017. In Sweden has no major change when it comes to the use of lay judges in criminal proceedings taken place in a long time.}}, author = {{Hertel, Carl}}, language = {{swe}}, note = {{Student Paper}}, title = {{Lekmannadomare i Sverige och Norge - en komparativ analys}}, year = {{2021}}, }