Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Lekmannadomarnas vara eller icke vara - En genomgång av för- och nackdelar ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv

Sewelén, Isabelle LU (2021) LAGF03 20211
Faculty of Law
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
I svensk rättsskipning har användningen av lekmannadomare månghundraåriga anor. Idag medverkar de i olika typer av dömande verksamhet som exempelvis i brottmål i tingsrätt. Motiven för att använda lekmän har varierat stort över tiden. Ordningen med nämndemännen har visat sig vara seglivad trots att det förekommit en hård kritik. Nämndemän antog tidigare i historien karaktären av bevisning. Därefter har de använts som en kollektiv röst vid omröstningen när flera meningar funnits. Numer ses de som individualiserade domare med likvärdig rösträtt som den juridiskt skolade domaren.
Nämndemannens medverkan i domstol är en intresseavvägning mellan allmänhetens intresse av insyn och intresset av effektiva och skyndsamma domstolar. Deras... (More)
I svensk rättsskipning har användningen av lekmannadomare månghundraåriga anor. Idag medverkar de i olika typer av dömande verksamhet som exempelvis i brottmål i tingsrätt. Motiven för att använda lekmän har varierat stort över tiden. Ordningen med nämndemännen har visat sig vara seglivad trots att det förekommit en hård kritik. Nämndemän antog tidigare i historien karaktären av bevisning. Därefter har de använts som en kollektiv röst vid omröstningen när flera meningar funnits. Numer ses de som individualiserade domare med likvärdig rösträtt som den juridiskt skolade domaren.
Nämndemannens medverkan i domstol är en intresseavvägning mellan allmänhetens intresse av insyn och intresset av effektiva och skyndsamma domstolar. Deras kontrollfunktion är emellertid tvetydig och motstridig. Hur kan exempelvis en domare utöva insynskontroll mot sig själv? Påfallande i debatten är alltså att argumenten för ofta präglas av tyckande och övertygelser medan argumenten emot inte sällan understödjs av studier.
En rättsvetenskaplig metod har tillämpats i uppsatsen, varav teoretisk genomgång har kompletterats med andras studier. Syftet med uppsatsen har varit att i utgångpunkt i de mest förekommande argumenten som anförs för och emot systemet och utifrån de empiriska studierna, på ett djupgående sätt ge bäring åt de olika argumenten. Ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv har tillämpats för att bedöma huruvida systemet med lekmannadomare är tillfredsställande utifrån två kriterier; förutsebar och etisk godtagbarhet. Uppsatsen berör även frågan om nämndemannasystemet bör avskaffas men lämnar även vissa förslag på ändringar.
I kapitel fyra i uppsatsen presenteras argumenten samt belyses vissa forskningsstudier som är relevanta i ämnet. I en av studierna visas att nämndemännen i högre grad än juristdomare påverkades av irrelevant information. I den andra studien visas att nämndemännens politiska
3
övertygelser får genomslag på domarna. I avsnitt fem konstateras att den nuvarande ordningen inte är tillfredställande och att den innebär en utmaning för de stärkta rättssäkerhetsgarantierna som den Europeiska konventionen om mänskliga fri- och rättigheter tillförsäkrar medborgarna. Det finns därför goda skäl att fortsatt diskutera den nuvarande ordningen och vilka ändringar som skulle kunna aktualiseras. (Less)
Abstract
The use of laymen as judges dates back many centuries in the Swedish administration of justice. Today they participate in various types of sentencing activities, such as in criminal cases in district courts. The motives for using lay judges have varied greatly over time. The order with the judges has proved to be tenacious despite the harsh criticism. Previously in history the lay judges themselves assumed the nature of evidence. Later on they were seen as a collective, and it took a unanimous lay judge vote to overturn the legally trained judge when there were a difference in opinion about the outcome of the case. Nowadays the lay judges are seen as individualized judges with equal voting rights as the legally trained judge.
The lay... (More)
The use of laymen as judges dates back many centuries in the Swedish administration of justice. Today they participate in various types of sentencing activities, such as in criminal cases in district courts. The motives for using lay judges have varied greatly over time. The order with the judges has proved to be tenacious despite the harsh criticism. Previously in history the lay judges themselves assumed the nature of evidence. Later on they were seen as a collective, and it took a unanimous lay judge vote to overturn the legally trained judge when there were a difference in opinion about the outcome of the case. Nowadays the lay judges are seen as individualized judges with equal voting rights as the legally trained judge.
The lay judge’s participation in court is a balance of interests between the public's interest in transparency, and the interest in efficient and expeditious courts. However, this control function is ambiguous and contradictory. How can for example a lay judge exercise transparent control against himself? Striking in the debate is thus that the arguments in favour often solely are characterized by opinions and beliefs, while the arguments against not infrequently are supported by studies.
A jurisprudential method has been applied in the essay where theoretical review has been supplemented with others' empirical studies. The purpose of the essay has been to present the most common arguments in favour of or against the system and based on the empirical studies in a profound way give support to the various arguments. A perspective of the rule of law has been applied to assess whether or not the current system of lay judges can be considered satisfactory based on two key criteria; predictability and ethical acceptability. The essay also touches on the question of whether the laymen system should be abolished, but the essay also makes certain proposals for changes.
1
Section four presents the arguments and highlights certain research studies that are relevant for the subject. One of the studies demonstrates that the laymen judges were affected in a greater degree than legal judges by irrelevant information. The second study shows that the laymen judges' political views in fact do have an impact on the decisions. Section five states that the current system is unsatisfactory and that it poses a challenge to the strengthened procedural guarantees of law and order that the European Convention on Human Rights and Citizens assures citizens. Therefore, good reasons exist to continue discussing the current system and what changes could be brought to the fore. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Sewelén, Isabelle LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20211
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Processrätt, Nämndemän, Lekmannadomare, Rättsvetenskap, Rättssäkerhet, Rättvis rättegång, Allmänt rättsmedvetande
language
Swedish
id
9046000
date added to LUP
2021-06-29 16:35:48
date last changed
2021-06-29 16:35:48
@misc{9046000,
  abstract     = {{The use of laymen as judges dates back many centuries in the Swedish administration of justice. Today they participate in various types of sentencing activities, such as in criminal cases in district courts. The motives for using lay judges have varied greatly over time. The order with the judges has proved to be tenacious despite the harsh criticism. Previously in history the lay judges themselves assumed the nature of evidence. Later on they were seen as a collective, and it took a unanimous lay judge vote to overturn the legally trained judge when there were a difference in opinion about the outcome of the case. Nowadays the lay judges are seen as individualized judges with equal voting rights as the legally trained judge.
The lay judge’s participation in court is a balance of interests between the public's interest in transparency, and the interest in efficient and expeditious courts. However, this control function is ambiguous and contradictory. How can for example a lay judge exercise transparent control against himself? Striking in the debate is thus that the arguments in favour often solely are characterized by opinions and beliefs, while the arguments against not infrequently are supported by studies.
A jurisprudential method has been applied in the essay where theoretical review has been supplemented with others' empirical studies. The purpose of the essay has been to present the most common arguments in favour of or against the system and based on the empirical studies in a profound way give support to the various arguments. A perspective of the rule of law has been applied to assess whether or not the current system of lay judges can be considered satisfactory based on two key criteria; predictability and ethical acceptability. The essay also touches on the question of whether the laymen system should be abolished, but the essay also makes certain proposals for changes.
1
Section four presents the arguments and highlights certain research studies that are relevant for the subject. One of the studies demonstrates that the laymen judges were affected in a greater degree than legal judges by irrelevant information. The second study shows that the laymen judges' political views in fact do have an impact on the decisions. Section five states that the current system is unsatisfactory and that it poses a challenge to the strengthened procedural guarantees of law and order that the European Convention on Human Rights and Citizens assures citizens. Therefore, good reasons exist to continue discussing the current system and what changes could be brought to the fore.}},
  author       = {{Sewelén, Isabelle}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Lekmannadomarnas vara eller icke vara - En genomgång av för- och nackdelar ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}