The biggest difference between a Swedish and American trial is the nature of the jury. Rather than having a "jury of one's peers" like in the U.S., Sweden has a system of elected laypersons who serve as lay judges (nämndeman) in conjunction with the professional judge (rådman). There are 3 lay judges and one professional judge for each trial. Lay judges are elected during municipal elections and serve a term of four years. They can serve multiple terms. A lay judge is required to serve at least eight days per year, but might be asked to volunteer for additional days if the need arises. After all of the testimony is taken, the 3 nämndeman and the rådman meet to deliberate. Each of the four has an equal vote, and in a criminal case, 3 guilty votes are required for a conviction.
As with jury service in the U.S., an employer is require by law to give a lay judge time off to serve when there is a trial. As a practial matter, however, a person does't generally run for the position if he or she knows it would cause a hardship or inconvenience for the employer. The result is that many of the people who self-select to run for the position of nämndeman either own their own businesses, and therefore have more flexibility, or are retired. Some Swedes with whom I spoke acknowleged that that the pool of lay judges may not accurately reflect a cross-section of the society as a whole. On the other hand, the idea of having one's guilt or innocence decided by a group of 12 people with no legal training and with biases of their own was a troubling concept to some Swedes.
The judges did not vote right away in the case that I observed. Before they left the courtroom, they graciously allowed me to snap this photo of them:
From left to right: nämndeman 1, nämndeman 2, rådman, court clerk, nämndeman 3
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment