[ad_1]
Anti-confusion tools in court are sufficient, but judges must make sure to use them. This is the opinion of several district court heads in a survey of court disturbances. Others suggest harsher penalties for interruption, although it is doubtful that it will help in all situations.
If someone interferes in a negotiation, the person can be expelled or fined. Stock Photography.
If someone tampers with the order during a court hearing, the presiding judge can remove the person from the courtroom. If you are a party to the case, you can follow the hearing from another room. The president can also impose a fine for a misdemeanor, up to a maximum of 4,000 SEK.
But is this enough to keep order? That question was raised after an unusually chaotic hearing was reported at the Södertörn District Court. TT has sent a questionnaire to the 48 heads of district courts in the country. A total of 40 responses were received and about half of them believe that the existing tools are sufficient.
The available tools are entirely adequate but, of course, must be used by the person leading the negotiation. If the tools are not used, there may be a gradual erosion of the court’s authority and its important social role, ”writes Lars-Gunnar Lundh in the Västmanland District Court.
“There are tools like rejection, petty crimes, etc., but the judges are afraid to use them,” says Anna-Karin Lundberg of the Skaraborg District Court.
The moderates have proposed that disorderly conduct in the courtroom result in one month in prison. Also in the survey, increased fines or imprisonment are highlighted as possible tools against disorder.
Lennart Strinäs, acting lawyer at the Malmö District Court, has no opinion on what the scale of penalties should look like, but points out that fines in most cases are not an effective means.
– Say you have a murder trial, and then someone says something stupid and you are sentenced to a 3,000 SEK fine. Needless to say, it has no effect. It is not about them being fined and then behaving in an exemplary manner. The tool that we have in those situations, and that works, is expulsion. If you sit in another room and listen, you are completely isolated from the possibility of disturbing the main audience, he says.
Magnus Widebäck, a lawyer for the Nyköping District Court, emphasizes the responsibility of the judge:
“The president may have to be very determined and really respectful, also in relation to professional actors. A judge must do that. Otherwise, of course, the referee is a wrong recruit. “
