Perceptions of Lay Judges About Independence of the Judiciary

Frans Van Dijk

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-63143-7_4

Abstract

AbstractLay judges are citizens with particular knowledge of and experience with the judiciary. The findings of a survey among the lay judges of ten judiciaries are examined in this chapter. It is found that the perceptions of lay judges of judicial independence, their own as well as that of the professional judges, are very similar to the perceptions of the professional judges. In addition, lay judges are most positive about their independence, when they participate in judicial panels together with professional judges and when they are taken seriously by the professional judges. For them, these conditions surpass sitting alone as a judge. Although selection effects may play a role, the results indicate that experience as a lay judge leads to a much higher appreciation of judicial independence than that of (highly educated) citizens in general. This in turn indicates that the views of the general public are too negative about judicial independence.

Highlights

Lay judges are citizens with particular knowledge of and experience with the judiciary
Lay judges are in a position to be more objective about the judiciary than the professional judges as well as the parties and lawyers
According to CEPEJ lay judges are working in all areas of law, and in some countries this is the case (Denmark, Norway and, except family cases, Belgium)

Summary

Lay Judges and Judicial Independence

Lay judges are a potentially interesting group when one wants to know more about perceptions of the independence of the judiciary. These findings suggest that direct observation and participation in the adjudication of cases lead to higher appreciation of the work of judges This presupposes that the opinions that the persons held before they became lay judges were similar to those of the (highly educated) general public. Cultural adaptation to the dominant professional judges, combined with lack of understanding what really goes on during trials, cannot be excluded as cause for positive perceptions These findings show, similarity with the outcomes of research into the perceptions of citizens about the evaluation of evidence and the severity of sentences in criminal cases in the Netherlands: once citizens had to decide on sentences themselves with knowledge of the facts of the case, the initial view that actual sentences were too lenient disappeared, and the opinions of judges and citizens converged (Wagenaar 2008). Members of the public are apparently so unfamiliar with the judiciary that a large shift in opinions is possible, once the knowledge gap has been filled

Interaction of Lay Judges and Professional Judges

Findings

What Do Lay Judges Think About Professional Judges?