291 Different control mechanisms functioned in high courts and lower courts. There was the right of appeal in civil cases, which thus meant a passive review system: if no one appealed against a judgement, then it was never reviewed. In criminal cases, on the other hand, all the judgements passed by a lower court were reviewed by the high court through referral of cases and scrutiny of the judgement books. Active organized control of the high court’s own handling of cases occurred only when it referred a case to the King in Council. To a large extent, the high court itself decided when this should happen. Control was exercised by the King in Council through the basic ordinances and through control of recruitment; the King in Council appointed the members of the high court and the most important officials. Within this framework the high court operated in relative freedom and independence, with no detailed control. The lower courts were governed by the old laws with their prescriptions on formal matters; the high court supervised their observance of the regulations. 2. Göta High Court consisted of its president and twelve assessors, six nobles and six commoners. In the years between 1635 and 1700, about seventy assessors left their posts or were appointed. They were of varying age and differed in the length of their experience. Towards the end of the century, six had taken doctorates in law, while others had experience of the practical administration of justice. Göta High Court in the seventeenth century can be described as a professional body. Referred criminal cases were handled on the basis of written material. If the high court requested, the examination and the judgement of the lower court could be supplemented or repeated, but there was no new hearing in the high court. The accused, the witnesses, and others did not appear in person; they remained names on paper. The resolutions were initially concise, often with no explanatory statement, but towards the end of the century they became more detailed. This was a reflection of the development of the high court into an assembly of specialists. At the same time, a special judicial language was evolved, larded with Latin words and expressions. The laws the high court was expected to interpret and apply were the medieval laws, the additions to these which were made in 1608 in the formof extracts from the Pentateuch in the Old Testament (the Appendix) and the ordinances that were issued on a running basis. The high court used these to shape judicial practice in the seventeenth century. It has been claimed that the high court’s attitude to the Appendix differed from their attitude to the native laws. Practice shows, however, that the court was equally free in its application of both types of legal sources.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=