308 the separation between the judiciary and the administration was greater in Sweden, since there was no such separation in Russia, where administrative and judicial functions were exercised by the same bodies or officials. But this does not mean that one must accept von Puttkamer’s thesis that the Svea Court of Appeals did not serve as a model for the iustits-kollegiia. This question can only be answered after a study of the actual source materials, and von Puttkamer has conducted no such study. In addition, it is necessary to differentiate between two separate questions, something else that von Puttkamer has not done. The first of these questions is to what extent the Swedish judicial system served as a model for the Russian reform, and the second is to what extent it was possible, given the differences between the legal traditions of the two societies, to carry out, in Russia, a legal reform based on Swedish models. The fact that the separation of the judiciary and the administration had gone further in Sweden than in Russia does not mean that the Russians could not make an attempt to copy the Swedish system. Before investigating the extent to which the Svea Court of Appeals actually served as a model for the iustits-kollegiia, a brief description of the organization and responsibilities of the former seems in order. The Svea Court of Appeals, founded in 1614, was the first permanent admlnlstrative organ in Sweden organized according to the collegial principle.^® The court was made up of a prescribed number of judges who reached all decisions by means of a carefully regulated voting procedure in which the opinion of the majority was decisive. The statute on trial procedure of 1615 prescribed the following order for voting in the Svea Court of Appeals: “he who sits lowest first makes his opinion known in the first matter, then in another matter the next one up from him, and further in the third and fourth matters and thereafter upward according to where they sit, right up to the chairman himself." The organizational form which the Svea Court of Appeals represented was not an original Swedish phenomenon; collegially organized courts of law were common in Europe long before it was established. It is probable, therefore, that the Svea Court of Appeals was patterned after some foreign model, and it is possible to identify points of similarity between it and the German Reichskammergerichtr^ Once the Svea Court of Appeals had Peters des Grosser),’’ Zeitschrift fiir auslämlisches öffentliebes Recht und Völkerrecht, 19 (1958), 378. Alfred Bernhard Carlsson, Den svenska centralförvaltningen (Stockholm, 1913), 7. ** Johan Schmedeman, ed.. Kungliga stadgar, förordningar, bref och resolutioner ifrån år 1538 in til 1701 angående justitiae- och exekutionsährender (Uppsala, 1706), 147. 1521—1809 -® Sture Petrén, “Hovrättens uppbyggnad 1614—1654,” in Sture Petrén et al., Svea hovrätt. Studier till 350-årsminnet (Stockholm, 1964), 58.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=