While mingling with the other guests, Zelig praises the upper crust in a refined accent.As soon as he descends the stairs, down to the servants’ quarters, Zelig starts to rage against the privileged classes in a thick proletarian accent.Whereas Zelig is eventually hospitalized and cured of his strange aliment, there seems very little hope for legal doctrine. Nordling indicated that legal doctrine must be considered parallel to other sources of binding legal arguments.32 Nordling claimed that doctrine occupies a place apart from others sources of law, which might be attributed to its apparent lack of independent characteristics. Like Leonard Zelig, legal doctrine appears to emulate the widely different characteristics of other sources of law, including their legitimacy, instead of exhibiting a character and legitimacy of its own. Could this be the reason for the inconsistent views on legal doctrine as a source of law? It has been argued that the reason for the extensive use of legal doctrine among Swedish jurists – in open conflict with the teachings of legal scholars – is largely, if not exclusively, due to convenience.According to this view, legal doctrine mainly consists of labour-saving inventories of other sources of law. Instead of having to scour through the original sources, jurists will settle for a cut-and-paste version of law, courtesy of legal scholars.This would certainly go a long way towards explaining the discrepancy between scholarly scepticism and the enthusiasm of jurists, since the first group primarily value the independence of a legal source, while the latter are more concerned with saving time and thus money.This assumption is, as least partly, consistent with statistical data.When asked which source of law they would turn to first when researching a point of law, 5.6 percent of Swedish jurists declared that legal doctrine would be their first port of call. Despite being beaten soundly by statute law – the winner at a staggering 87.6 percent – legal doctrine was again declared the runner-up, well ahead of both case law (1.3 percent) and preparatory works (0.3 percent).33The statistics seem to confirm the assumption that the value attributed to legal doctrine is largely due to its ability to synthesize large amounts of information emanating from other legal sources. There is, however, a serious flaw in this reasoning.The assumption is inconsistent with the further results of the survey.When asked the pire cht swi s s e n scha f t al s j ur i st i sch e dok t r i n 304 32 Nordling, ibidem, p 28: “Legal doctrine, or the theory of law, stands beside the other emanations of law, in that it guides and enlightens the law-maker and judiciary, while preserving the unity within the legal system”. 33 Sandgren, ibidem, Part I, p 599.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=