the svea court of appeal in the early modern period 98 In this state of crisis, the legitimacy of the administration was important, and the Court of Appeal was a tool for furthering this end. After all, the provision of justice to those who had not been able to have it previously was one of the main functions of the court. This also echoes what Schroderus wrote about the establishment of the Court being an expression of good policy that helped to keep the king in power as mentioned above. The people needed to be shown that even high officials were not immune from prosecution if they used their position to enrich themselves unjustly at the expense of individuals or the crown. In 1614, it remained somewhat unclear what the “hovrätt” was and what its tasks were. It was a panel of judges, presided over by the Lord Chief Justice, the drots, sitting in Stockholm and acting in the name of, in lieu of and with the authority of the king. Its duties were multifarious and very generally defined, reflecting the administration of justice and justice-related correspondence normally handled almost exclusively by the royal Chancery. The Court took over many justice-related petitions and used the King’s authority diligently in attempting to provide lawful process of law for the subjects of His Majesty. The Court’s activity in its first year does not support the view that its president, Count Magnus Brahe, was “lax and lazy,” often only one noble member was present, and “little business was attempted in vacation.”282 As has been argued in the introduction, the founding of the first court of appeal was not a sign of a severe crisis in the Swedish administration of justice. The Council of the Realm, supplemented by more temporary judges, had for some time exercised royal judicial powers. Rather, it was an indication of the political and economic crisis of the Swedish realm that could potentially threaten the survival of the young king, Gustav II Adolf, on the throne of Sweden. There was a many centuries long tradition of elective monarchy in Sweden. Although a hereditary monarchy had been established in 1544, this had not managed to change the high politics in 282 Roberts, Michael 1953 p. 267. Moreover, as Marianne Vasara-Aaltonen has pointed out in her chapter in this volume, the absence of Court of Appeal judges can to a considerable extent be explained by their multitasking in the service of the crown. Conclusion
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=