10 systemin Finland.--^ There was, then, no abrupt break in development. The inherited Swedish constitutions established that the law bills concerning Finland had to be initiated in the Finnish Diet. However, because the Diet did not convene, the legal development until 1863 occurred largely through court practice; thereafter, the ideological influence for legal reforms originated in Germany and Sweden (not Russia-^). It was in the second half of the century that Finland’s legal development joined that of the rest of Europe.-^^ Like the laws, the Finnish court systemwas also inherited fromthe Swedish era. There were two kinds of local courts, hundred courts {kihlakunnanoikeus, häradsrätt) for the countryside and city courts {raastuvanoikeus, rådstuvurätt) for the townships. High courts, of which there were three,-^ formed the appellate instance. The greatest principal difference from the past was that, in the court structure of the Autonomy, the Supreme Court of Sweden was replaced by the Judicial Department of the Senate.Its members were nominated for three-year periods and not for life. The head of the Finnish court hierarchy was, then, not even an actual court in the modern sense of the word. As we shall see later, this probablv had a bearing on the rather weak position of the JDS. For a reader not familiar with Finnish legal and constitutional history, it may seem surprising that although Finland belonged to the Russian Empire practically all through the nineteenth century, Russian history plays a rather modest role in this study. The autonomous Grand Duchy had its own legal system and administration. Nevertheless, the possibility of Russian influence on Finnish legislation and judicial decision-making cannot a priori be ruled out. Throughout the century, however, direct Russian influence on the Finnish It was, however, not clear what Alexander I meant by “constitutions.” The Swedish constitutions included the Formtsf Government of 1772 and the Union and Securitv Act of 1789 which had established Gustavus III as absolute ruler. In keeping with the contemporary natural law thinking, the Finns did not inform the ruler of any particular positive statutes, but rather of the principles bv which thev had been governed. Consequently, Alexander did not confirmthe validitv of any particular statutes, but instead referred to the laws of Finland in general. It was onlv towards 1820 that the more precise conception of the 1772 Formof Government and the 1789 Union and Security Act began to be presented by the Finns as the fundamental laws confirmed by the Czar. Jussila 1969 pp. 107—113; also Jvranki 1989 pp. 403-408. In Russia, the liberal wave commence in 1855 with ascendance to the throne of Alexander II. Thereafter, the Russian economy was gradually liberalized. Ylikangas 1986 p. 115. It is interesting that liberal procedural reforms, with the principle of free evaluation of evidence, were rapidly enacted as well; see Raiser 1972. See Kekkonen 1987 on the realization of liberal economic reforms in Finland in 1855-1879. The High Court of Turku had been founded in 1623, and that of Vaasa in 1776. The High Court of Vyborg was founded, on the initiative of the Emperor Nicholas II, in Vaasa in 1839. The Senate was divided into two departments, the judicial and the economic. The members of the judicial department usuallv had a background as judge, whereas members of the economic department were mostly administrative bureaucrats. Tyynilä 1991 p. 138.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=