"... okunniga om rättssystemet...”. En kvalitativ studie kring lagfarna domares erfarenheter av lekmannamedverkan

This paper will illustrate legally knowledgeable judges’ experiences of working with lay judges in the district courts of Sweden, as well as their advantages and disadvantages within the judicial field. The system of lay judges has been subject for discussion both within the media and internally within the court. This may be partly due to the general lack of legal knowledge withheld by the lay judges and their frequent recruitment by political parties. In order to achieve the purpose of the study, 12 legally experienced judges, working at any of the district courts in the southern part of Sweden, were interviewed about their experiences working with lay judges. The various statements will be analyzed with Bourdieu’s theories of independent social spheres, within which exists intense competition. The material will be further analyzed by Bourdieu’s main concepts: field, capital and habitus. The study’s results and analysis is divided into five themes: Competence within the law, Representativeness, Political recruitment and impact, Legal certainty, and finally, A change of the lay judge system. The results concluded that there exists substantial disagreement about the various functions of lay judges and their influence within the judicial field. Three of the informants wanted to abolish the system altogether. Another informant felt that the system should be abolished, however not completely. The seven other informants mentioned that the participation of lay judges was positive in various aspects, but that altogether was in need of change. Finally, only one informant gave the opinion that it would be both unfavorable and detrimental to eliminate the lay judge system. The study builds clarity on the fact that the system has both its advantages and disadvantages. Furthermore, the interviews illustrate that these factors are generally not discussed in a favorable extent, to which the majority of respondents admit that they have not closely considered certain aspects of the system