HOW IT BEGAN
Pedersöre is one of the oldest settlements in the country, which is why much of Finland’s judicial history is closely connected to Pedersöre. There is no confirmed information about Pedersöre’s age or the origin of its name. The parish of Pedersöre is first mentioned in official documents dating from 1348, but archaeological evidence indicates that the area has been inhabited since prehistoric times. In his book on the history of Pedersöre parish, K. V. Åkerblom writes about Hundraberget in present-day Forsby village, where burial mounds attest to a prehistoric settlement. A spearhead dating from the 12th century was also found in the village. In 1993, Forsby Hembygdsförening (the local heritage society) published a book on the village’s history, describing Hundraberget and noting that in the 9th century, the shores of the Gulf of Bothnia ran through the village.
The first records of justice in the area date back to the 11th and 12th centuries. People gathered outdoors at well-known locations to decide on matters of common concern. “Thing stones” and “stone circles”—stones arranged in a circle as meeting places—are remnants of these ancient assemblies. These gatherings represent the oldest known forms of local governance in the country.
It is not known whether people at that time had any established laws or rules to follow. A. Liljestrand wrote about this topic in 1866 in an article in Juridiska Föreningens Tidskrift (the journal of the Finnish Juridical Association): “The small, scattered families across a vast and rugged territory probably had little contact with one another. Under such circumstances, little formal justice was needed; and when it did arise, it was enough to have a flexible bow and a sharp arrow, and to rely on a few simple maxims—dictated by instinct or generally recognized—about what is mine and what is yours.” (rough translation to English)
THE EVOLUTION FROM MEDIEVAL TO MODERN-DAY DISTRICT COURTS
A more organised judicial system emerged in the 13th century. During this time, the Swedish provinces had their own written provincial laws. In Finland, there were no equivalent written laws, so Swedish provincial laws were applied, depending on the extent of migration from Sweden and the provinces from which the settlers originated. According to A. Liljeström in his previously mentioned article in JFT (1866), the law most commonly applied in Finland was Hälsingelagen. Hundraberget in Forsby may indicate that the provincial laws of Svealand were applied in Pedersöre at some point. The district laws in Svealand were called “hundare,” which, according to K. V. Åkerblom, were linked to named locations such as Hundraberget. The name Hundraberget suggests it may have been the site of Pedersöre’s earliest local administrative gatherings.
Through the provincial and town laws introduced by Magnus Eriksson in the 14th century, Finland developed a more unified system of justice. The provincial law, which governed rural areas, required a häradsting (hundred court) chaired by a häradshövding (chief judge of the hundred), and a lagmansting (lawman’s court) headed by a lagman (lawman). In both courts, the presiding judge was assisted by a 12-member panel of lay judges. It is from this period that the lay judges became known colloquially as “tolvmän” (“twelve-men”), referring to their role on the twelve-member panel assisting the judge.
From 1407, during Sweden’s Kalmar Union period, the courts became increasingly well organized. The first judicial districts in the kingdom were established during this time, including one in Ostrobothnia. Its southern border was at Satakunda, extending northwards to Lapland, as far as that region was known at the time. In the east, it bordered Savolax, and in the west, it reached the Gulf of Bothnia. Paavo Alkio, President of the Court of Appeal, wrote in his book on the Vasa Court of Appeal (1776–1976) that in 1556, the Ostrobothnian judicial district was led by two häradshövdingar (chief judges of the hundred), but it was not officially divided into northern and southern judicial districts until 1648. The border ran along Vörå, placing that parish in the southern district, while Pedersöre belonged to the northern district. The next division concerning Pedersöre took place in 1762, when the northern judicial district was divided into two parts. From then on, the Ostrobothnian judicial districts, now totaling three, were named the Northern, Middle, and Southern Judicial Districts of Ostrobothnia. Pedersöre belonged to the Middle Judicial District of Ostrobothnia. When the Vasa High Court of Appeal was founded in 1776, a decree dated 28 June of the same year incorporated these three judicial districts (among others) into its judicial circuit.
In 1804, the Middle Judicial District of Ostrobothnia was further divided into the Upper and Lower Middle Judicial Districts. Pedersöre was assigned to the Upper Middle District. The northern border ran along Lochteå parish (which was included in the Upper Middle District), and the southern border ran along Nykarleby parish, which belonged to the Lower Middle District.
1846 REORGANIZATION OF JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
Roughly forty years later, in 1846, the judicial districts in Ostrobothnia were reorganized. The northern part of the Upper Middle Judicial District of Ostrobothnia became Gamlakarleby Judicial District. The remaining areas—including Pedersöre parish, Larsmo, Esse, and Purmo chapels—together with Nykarleby parish and others, formed the new Nykarleby Judicial District. The northern border of Nykarleby Judicial District placed Kronoby in Gamlakarleby Judicial District, while the southern border extended to Vörå.
1955 DIVISION AND CREATION OF PEDERSÖRE JUDICIAL DISTRICT
This arrangement remained in place for just over a century, until 1955, when Nykarleby Judicial District was divided. The Swedish-speaking municipalities formed Pedersöre Judicial District, while the Finnish-speaking municipalities became Kauhava Judicial District. Previously, these areas had been organized as parishes and chapels rather than municipalities. This was the first—and unfortunately the last—time Pedersöre had its own judicial district. However, the administrative office was located in Jakobstad, as it had been for the former Nykarleby Judicial District.
THE 1993 LOWER COURT REFORM
Pedersöre Judicial District existed until 1993, when the town court of Jakobstad was dissolved as part of a major reform of Finland’s lower courts. Pedersöre Judicial District was merged with Jakobstad to form the Jakobstad District Court. This reform was the largest to date for Finland’s lower courts: both judicial districts and town courts were abolished, replaced by a unified system of district courts. The composition of the courts and the procedures for trials were also modernized.
Before the reform, Finland had 72 judicial districts and 33 town courts. The reform initially created 67 district courts, but this number quickly fell to 27. The Minister of Justice has since announced plans to reduce the number of district courts to 20. In Swedish-speaking and bilingual Ostrobothnia, there had been up to three judicial districts and six town courts. In the former Vasa County, there were six additional judicial districts, for a total of 15 lower courts. Following the planned dissolution of the Central Ostrobothnia District Court, only two district courts will remain in the region: Vasa and Seinäjoki. Today, the Vasa District Court is the last Swedish-speaking district court on mainland Finland.
THE END OF LOCAL COURTS IN PEDERSÖRE
The district court in Jakobstad was also dissolved during the reform. In 2002, it was merged into the Korsholm District Court, which was based in Vasa. However, a branch office remained in Jakobstad with a small staff. In 2010, the Korsholm District Court was itself merged into the Vasa District Court. At that time, the Jakobstad branch office was closed, although a courtroom and space for two court officers were retained. According to the Minister of Justice, this remaining court site is also scheduled to be closed. There is, however, hope that it might remain open until 2025. After that, nearly a thousand years of local judicial administration with court sites in Pedersöre will come to an end.
JUDICIAL DISTRICTS AND COURTS INCLUDING PEDERSÖRE OVER THE YEARS
- Ostrobothnia Judicial District, established 1407
- Northern Judicial District of Ostrobothnia, established 1648
- Middle Judicial District of Ostrobothnia, established 1762
- Upper Middle Judicial District of Ostrobothnia, established 1804
- Nykarleby Judicial District, established 1846
- Pedersöre Judicial District, established 1955
- District Court of Jakobstad, established 1993
- District Court of Korsholm, into which Jakobstad District Court was merged in 2002
- Vasa District Court, into which Korsholm District Court (including Jakobstad) was merged in 2010
- From 2018 onward, the Central Ostrobothnia District Court is assigned to Vasa District Court
LAWMAN’S COURT
Initially, there was only one Lawman’s Court in the whole country. Later, the number increased to five, before the Lawman’s Courts were abolished in 1868. The Lawman’s Court mainly handled civil cases. In some instances, it also acted as an appellate court in criminal matters.
Lagmansgården (“Lawman’s Estate”) in Östensö, Pedersöre, is a testament to the Lawman’s Court’s presence in Ostrobothnia. In 1776, Gustav Idman was appointed Lawman in the newly established Vasa and Uleå Judicial Districts. Idman had a Lawman’s estate built on the Isakas Crown holding in Östensö, where he held court sessions and lived until his death in 1795. From 1793 onwards, Idman was succeeded by other lawmen who lived elsewhere, and court sessions were no longer held in Östensö. Today, Lagmansgården survives as a home and school for children with behavioural and emotional challenges.
THE OPERATIONS OF THE HUNDRED COURTS
Originally, the court in Finland functioned both as an administrative authority and as a judicial body. The hundred court was the main organ of local self-government. It was not until 1865 that administrative matters were officially separated from judicial proceedings, following an imperial decree on municipal administration.
Until the end of the 17th century, the church also handled a wide range of worldly legal matters, which were gradually transferred to the hundred courts. Guardianship cases and inheritance disputes, for example, had previously been dealt with at parish assemblies. By a resolution in 1684, these and many other matters were assigned to the hundred courts. One telling detail from this resolution illustrates life at the time: any brawls that occurred in church were henceforth to be handled by the hundred courts instead of the church itself.
THE EVOLUTION OF DISTRICT COURTS
Although Magnus Eriksson’s provincial law provided a fairly detailed legal framework, its practical implementation developed slowly. During the early 15th century, assemblies were still held outdoors. Beginning in 1407, district courts gradually began to evolve, and regulations were issued regarding court sites.
Local law enforcers, known in Swedish as länsmän (plural of länsman, with no exact English equivalent), were required to make their homes available for court sessions. K. V. Åkerblom notes several such sessions held in the homes of länsmän in Pedersöre between 1550 and 1734. Holding courts in the länsmän’s homes was practical, as they often operated guesthouse services for travelers on official business. Both officials and ordinary participants could stay in these guesthouses during court proceedings.
In 1734, however, länsmän and other officials were prohibited from maintaining secondary occupations outside their official duties, thereby freeing them from the obligation to host court sessions. From that point on, courts were mainly held in sockenstugor (parish meeting houses, typically located near the church). The Civil Code of 1734 stipulated that “Tingsbyggning skall vart härad bygga” — that is, each hundred was to build a courthouse. The Swedish Crown even provided blueprints for these buildings. Nevertheless, it would take over 200 years before the issue of court locations was fully resolved.
COURT SITES AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
From the earliest records of court sites, responsibility for them rested with the local administration. It was not until 1925 that this responsibility was transferred to the state. In 1956, an ordinance required that each judicial district have a courthouse approved by the Ministry of Justice. However, no purpose-built courthouses dedicated solely to the courts were constructed. Instead, court sessions were held in a wide variety of locations, including hostels, gymnasiums, association halls, Civil Guard buildings, and suitable farms.
It was not until the 1960s, with the construction of official government buildings, that judicial districts were provided with modern facilities. Pedersöre Judicial District received such offices in 1967, when all operations moved to the newly completed government building in Jakobstad. Consequently, the court sessions moved from the venerable courthouse to contemporary offices in the town’s government building.
Previously, there had been no need for offices or archives, as all administrative matters were handled during court sessions. The need for dedicated office space arose in the 19th century, when property cases and other notifications could be processed outside the regular court hours. Of the judicial districts to which Pedersöre belonged, Nykarleby Judicial District is believed to have been the first to maintain its own offices. During the final years of Chief Judge Martin Ingman’s tenure, these offices were located on Storgatan in Jakobstad, where Pedersöre Judicial District later established its first offices.
From 1974 to 1992, the court district’s offices were housed in the Frände House, at the corner of Köpmansgatan and Kvarnbacksgatan, although sessions continued to be held in the government building. In 1993, when Pedersöre Judicial District and Jakobstad Town Court were merged to form Jakobstad District Court, existing office spaces in the town hall were adapted for use, and sessions were held in the former town court session room or, if needed, in the town council chamber. The court sessions moved for the final time in 2013 to the new government building on Stationsgatan in Jakobstad. Prior to 2010, the administrative offices had been integrated with those of the Vasa District Court in Vasa.
The regulation in the Civil Code of 1734 regarding the construction of courthouses was seemingly ignored in most cases, with only a few exceptions. One likely reason for this was that the ecclesiastical administration already maintained parish meeting houses for their assemblies, so it was convenient to use the same spaces for public administration and court sessions. Such an arrangement was also natural, as it fell to the same taxpayers—local farmers—to provide the construction for public buildings. Why build both a parish house and a separate courthouse if one could serve both purposes?
THE COURTHOUSE OF PEDERSÖRE
Once the länsmän were relieved of the obligation to provide their farms for court sessions, Pedersöre began using the parish meeting house for the assemblies. The County Governors, assigned by the Crown, oversaw the court sites. At the autumn assembly in Pedersöre in 1780, the Governor’s proposal for building a courthouse in every hundred was presented. At that time, the parish house at Pedersöre Church had fallen into such disrepair that a new building was clearly necessary. This marked the beginning of Pedersöre’s courthouse, which still stands today as the only courthouse in Finland preserved in its original condition, constructed in accordance with the regulations of the 1734 Civil Code.
Building an courthouse in this period involved significant bureaucracy. The royal authorities issued detailed regulations on their design, and comprehensive blueprints were prepared by the Superintendency in Stockholm. In 1787, the people of Pedersöre attempted to construct their courthouse using their own blueprints. However, the County Governor insisted that it be built according to blueprints previously approved by the King. Fortunately, there was no need to draft new plans, as the same blueprints had already been approved by King Gustav III for a courthouse in Nykarleby.
On 24 June 1787, a contract was signed with Master Shipbuilder Johan Klubb from Östensö to build the courthouse for a price of ten riksdaler specie. Construction was completed within the same year on the highest point of the church hill, near the site of the old parish house. The building’s floor plan was typical of the Carolingian period. Its style followed the “Desein till et Öfverste Liutenants och Majors Boställe” (design for residences of Lieutenant Colonels and Majors).
The courtroom occupied the centre of the building, with an entrance hall of equal width in front, equipped with wall-mounted benches for the court assembly. A kitchen and a chamber were located in the northeast, and two additional chambers in the west. According to the blueprints, no external entrance porch was planned. However, as museum director Pekka Toivanen noted in an article in Jakobstads Tidning (8 December 2000), Klubb deviated from the Nykarleby blueprint and added an entrance porch at the west side. He also omitted a dormer window on the western roof slope. While the original plan specified a so-called mansard roof, the Pedersöre courthouse was completed with a hipped roof.
The courthouse has undergone a number of renovations over the years. In his aforementioned article, Toivanen writes that in the spring of 1820 a major renovation was carried out. A completely new roof was installed, made of knot-free pine boards, 7 ells long, 8 inches wide, and 1 inch thick, with a thin layer of flawless birch bark beneath. The following summer, the roof was tarred with a mixture of heated tar and red ochre. The walls were painted red, while the mouldings, corner joints, window frames, and shutters were painted with white oil-based paint. Several interior alterations were carried out in the 1830s. Around the turn of the 19th century, the stippled walls were covered with dark wallpaper, and tongue-and-groove panelling was added to the lower portion of the walls. A postcard from 1910 shows that at that time the roof was covered with felt, although it had originally been wooden boards. Today, the roof is tiled. Electricity was installed in the early 20th century. In 1973, the exterior walls were painted with latex paint, and later the cornerstones of the building were reinforced with brickwork.
Most of the interior furnishings in Gustavian style have been preserved. The court chest, which was required in every hundred, still exists. In the courtroom, the original judge’s and clerks’ desks remain, along with the judge’s seat—a Gustavian armchair. The side chambers still contain Gustavian spindle-back chairs and record cabinets with beautifully carved rosettes on the doors. A number of Karl-Johan or Bellman chairs were added to complement the original furnishings, according to Toivanen, in the early 19th century. Around the turn of the 20th century, new chairs were added for the lay judges, replacing the original Gustavian spindle-back chairs, though the original chairs remain in the courtroom.
From the outset, the courthouse served both as a parish house for church administration and as a facility for the hundred court. Following the Local Government Act of 1865, the building was also used for municipal purposes. After the revised Local Government Act of 1907, the courthouse, in addition to its judicial function, also served as the office and council chamber for Pedersöre municipality up until the 1950s. During wartime, public welfare services occupied part of the building. The courthouse has also been used for purposes entirely outside of its original administrative and judicial functions. Åkerholm and Toivanen note that during the 1808–09 war, it served as a hospital for the Russian military. When the Russian medical services returned the building to its original purpose in 1810, 28 windowpanes were broken, and several locks, three tiled stoves, the kitchen stove, and room floors were damaged and required repair.
The presence of a kitchen area suggests that the building may have been temporarily inhabited, though regular residential use was unlikely. In 1795, when the länsman applied for permission to live in the building, his request was denied. The kitchen area may have been intended to accommodate judges and other officials visiting from elsewhere during court sessions. In contrast, the model for Pedersöre courthouse, the judge’s residence in Vexala, served as a permanent home for the district judge.
The courthouse remained in use until the spring of 1967. The final winter court session in Pedersöre hundred concluded on Tuesday, 26 March, with District Court Notary Kaj Skåtar (later a well-known municipal politician and director of the cooperative bank) serving as chairman, and Ingvar Krook, later Supreme Court Justice and retired President of the Court of Appeal, acting as secretary.
It may be unclear whether Pedersöre courthouse should be referred to specifically as an “courthouse” or a “parish house.” From the beginning, the building served both ecclesiastical and civil administration, as well as the court. However, since the building was constructed at the request of the County Governor to serve as a hundred courthouse, and in accordance with regulations specific to courthouses, it is appropriate to call it Pedersöre courthouse. It is the only courthouse in Finland preserved in its original design and location. The courthouse in Nykarleby, erected on Domarbacken in Vexala, still exists, but it has been moved to the church village in Munsala and converted into a sports hall.
THE DETENTION HOUSE
A detention house was also required. According to the Civil Code of 1734, “Vid vart tingsställe skall och ett fängelse vara, där missgärningsmän måge i förvar hållas” (roughly translated: “Each court site shall also have a jailhouse, where wrongdoers are to be held”). The detention houses were solidly built with double log walls, with the space between filled with stones to prevent escapes. Inside, there were devices for chaining the prisoners.
The court site in Pedersöre had such a detention house. Accounts and films about daring escapes from infamous prisons abound, and Pedersöre’s detention house has its own dramatic escape story. On a night in March 1806, two prisoners managed to flee. One was a Härmä native imprisoned for manslaughter, and the other a Purmo native held for a third offense of church disturbance, awaiting their sentences. The Härmä prisoner had been chained with a 2-foot-long leg iron, as well as neck, body, and hand irons, with additional chains across the back and chest. The Purmo prisoner was unchained.
The detention house doors were made of two layers of inch-thick planks, secured with two iron bars across them, and additionally fastened with a large and sturdy external lock. Despite all these precautions, the prisoners managed to escape. The jailer had gone home for the night, contrary to regulations.
The detention house has since been demolished.
THE COURT DOCUMENT CHEST
The court document chest held a prominent role. In earlier years, the hundred court did not have its own office, so all important documents and essential items were stored in the chest. Directives regarding the chest date back at least to the 17th century. The Civil Code of 1734 contained detailed regulations about the court document chest: it was to be fitted with iron and secured with three locks. Among other things, the chest held the court’s seals, law books, official documents, and fines that had been imposed and collected.
The court document chest belonging to Pedersöre hundred has been preserved and is currently stored in the Jakobstad–Pietarsaari Museum archives.
THE JUDGES
The Chief Judge, or häradshövding, was the highest official in the hundred. Originally, he was appointed by the King based on the recommendation of a jury of twelve lay judges (tolvmän) in accordance with the Civil Code. The Chief Judge was not merely a judicial officer in the modern sense; he also acted as the head of administration in the district, hence the term “hövding” (chief) rather than simply “judge.” The emphasis on administrative duties likely explains why the local community, through the twelve-man jury, participated in his selection.
From the 16th century, however, the King began to bypass the local representatives, and the office of Chief Judge became a fief, with preferential rights granted to the nobility in 1569. Chief Judges often resided in Stockholm and rarely performed their duties in person, instead collecting income from their fiefdoms.
Court proceedings were usually conducted by law readers, appointed by the hundred court but paid by the Chief Judge. An interesting detail of the Chief Judge’s compensation was his share of imposed fines, which varied between one-third and one-half over the years. Under Russian rule, he was compensated through the so-called fee-based system (sportelsystem), receiving fees for each record and official document issued, along with additional payment from the state treasury. This system persisted in lower courts until the 1970s and was formally abolished in 1993, after which judges received only a regular monthly salary.
The absence of Chief Judges led to the creation of a separate group of judges known as law readers. The Court of Appeal, alongside the governor, oversaw the functions of the hundred courts. Officials were appointed by the Court of Appeal to preside over sessions in the Chief Judge’s absence, and these officials became known as law readers. The demand for trained law readers grew so high that the Turku Court of Appeal began educating officials specifically for this role from the 1630s. This was the precursor to today’s apprenticeship system for Court of Appeal clerks and district court notaries.
Because law readers lacked an official title corresponding to their position, they initially called themselves district judges until 1754, when the Court of Appeal granted them the official title of Deputy District Judge – a title still awarded to district court notaries after completing their apprenticeship. The title of district judge later passed to lay judges as recognition for long and commendable service. The need for these extra law readers diminished after King Charles XI of Sweden decreed in 1680 that the holder of a judicial office should perform all judicial duties themselves.
THE PANEL OF LAY JUDGES
J.H. Sandelin’s doctoral thesis on the district court panel provides excellent insight into the panel and its role in the court. Sandelin writes that the panel developed in Sweden and Finland is unique. Only Holland and a few cantons in Switzerland have comparable systems. In most countries where laypeople participate in the court, there is a jury that only determines guilt. In contrast, the Swedish/Finnish panel also participates in legal decisions regarding sentencing.
This has not always been the case. Initially, the panel did not participate in sentencing. However, unlike jury courts, the presiding judge in Swedish courts would intervene in cases where the panel’s votes were evenly split.
During the Old Swedish period (1225–1526), the administration of justice was carried out by the entire peasant assembly at the district court. All free men were obliged to attend. Gradually, judging became concentrated in a smaller group of men chosen for their personal qualities and social standing, who were considered better suited than the general populace to carry out judicial functions.
THE COMPURGATORS (OATH-HELPERS)
In the Swedish provincial laws of the 13th and 14th centuries, rules were established regarding which party bore the burden of proof in a case. The party required to prove their claim could select six men from the court assembly, who would swear an oath attesting to the claimant’s innocence or righteousness. If the party could present these six men and also swear their own oath, they were acquitted and declared the winning party. This procedure was known as the compurgation process.
A notable feature of this trial method was that no counterevidence could be presented. The opposing party was not allowed to refute the compurgators’ testimony or overturn their judgment. While the compurgators’ opinions were decisive, they held no judicial authority themselves; the court assembly retained ultimate authority to confirm the outcome.
The compurgation process was often preceded by the so-called Järnbörden (“ordeal of iron”). The individual required to prove a claim would hold a heated iron or walk on it with bare feet. The hand or foot was then wrapped in cloth for a set period. If the burn had healed by the end of this period, it was considered divine confirmation of the person’s claim. This method was also called the divine ordeal.
THE MEMBERS OF THE PANEL LAY JUDGES
Gradually, a procedure developed in which a smaller group of trusted men from the court assembly were chosen to form a panel responsible for judging. The rest of the assembly still participated by showing their approval of the panel’s decisions, raising their swords as a sign that the verdict would be carried out. In almost all provinces, the panel consisted of 12 members, although there were a few exceptions with higher or lower numbers.
In earlier years, the panel was selected separately for each case, with both parties choosing an equal number of members. Over time, a permanent panel was appointed for all cases at the court. From the late 15th century, panel members were elected for longer periods. Selection of the panel shifted from the disputing parties to the local administration of the hundred. Panel members cast individual votes, in contrast to a jury, which has a single collective vote. Seven votes were required for a verdict to prevail. If the votes were evenly split, the presiding judge or Chief Judge held the deciding vote. There were exceptions to this rule; for instance, Östgötalagen (the provincial law in East Gothland) stipulated that an evenly split vote resulted in an acquittal.
The courts established under the provincial laws were organized so that the panel was responsible for determining the facts of the case (i.e., evaluating evidence), except in the instances noted when votes were tied. The Chief Judge, as the highest-ranking official in the hundred and chairman of the court, alone decided the legal question, i.e., the sentence. This structure remained until the end of the 17th century. J.H. Sandelin notes in his doctoral thesis that the court panel held the real power in the hundred courts. This was due to the rigid legal system of the time, which had fixed punishments and no flexibility or appeals. The chairman’s role was largely ceremonial, limited to reading the prescribed sentence from the law book.
With the implementation of the Civil Code of 1734, the old organization and the panel’s dominant position in the court changed. Chapter 23, paragraph 2 of the Code of Judicial Procedure stipulated:
“When a judgment is rendered at the district court, the Chief Judge shall inform the court panel about the case, regarding both facts and legal questions. If the court panel disagrees with the Chief Judge, the opinion of the panel shall prevail, and the panel shall be responsible for its verdict. If the panel is not unanimous, the judgment decided by the Chief Judge shall stand.”
This provision united the Chief Judge and the panel into a single entity within the court, jointly deciding both factual and legal questions.
Today, the visibility of the court panel in district courts is significantly reduced. The number of panel members was first reduced from 8 to 5. From 1991, it was further reduced to 3 members, and in special cases, 4. The panel thereafter participated only in criminal cases where the maximum sentence was one year or more, and in certain family law cases, such as child custody. In 2008, panel involvement was limited to cases where the maximum sentence was two years or more. Certain property crimes, like aggravated theft, are now handled by professional judges even when the sentence exceeds two years. The most recent reduction occurred in 2014, when panel membership was cut to 2, and in special cases, 3. The lay judge element is preserved in some specialized courts, such as the property court, where panel members are known as godemän, trustees or guardians managing estates.
SOME WORDS ABOUT CASES HANDLED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS DURING EARLIER TIMES
Detailed records of court cases are only available from the 16th century onwards, when formal record-keeping began and court registers and plaintiff lists were created. Until the Local Government Act of 1865, administrative matters were also handled in the district courts. These included, for example, the maintenance of roads and stake-and-rail fences, as well as the use of parish commons.
On the civil or private law side, most cases concerned ownership and possession rights. Disputes over the use of grazing land and fishing waters were also common. During the 18th and 19th centuries, conflicts regarding the employment conditions and wages of maids and farmhands occurred frequently.
SOME EXAMPLES OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS IN EARLIER TIMES
People were surprisingly quarrelsome and quick to bring insults to court. For example, Ernst Olsson was fined at the district court in Pedersöre for calling Per Eriksson a scoundrel and a Lappare (an archaic, derogatory term for someone of Sámi origin). Insults often escalated into violence, ranging from a slap to manslaughter. An interesting observation about the punishment of violent crimes is that acts committed in the heat of the moment were typically punished only with fines, whereas premeditated murder was always punished by death. During the period of Russian rule, the death penalty could sometimes be commuted to deportation to Siberia.
Marital crimes were among the most serious offenses. During the 16th century and into part of the 17th century, such offenses were punished only with fines, but court records from the late 17th century show that the punishment had escalated to death.
The old Swedish laws are known for the so-called peace laws, which protected especially important societal functions. The most famous, established by Birger Jarl in the early 13th century, were laws safeguarding the home, protecting women, defending the church, and ensuring the sanctity of the court assembly. The law protecting women upheld their right to freedom and personal integrity. Rape was punishable by death.
Adultery resulted in a fine. The laws protecting the church and the court assembly were not repealed until 1970. The laws safeguarding the home and protecting women remain in force today.
Ownership rights were important even in earlier times. The Civil Code of 1442 stipulated that “he who stole goods worth more than half a mark (a unit of currency) shall be bound, brought to court, judged, and hanged.”
In modern times, infanticide—when a mother kills her newborn under severe psychological distress—is considered a less severe crime against life. This was not the case in earlier times. The Civil Code prescribed that “the woman was to be burned.” A census record from Pedersöre in 1780 notes a “child murderer decapitated and burned at the stake.” Infanticide was a serious and frequent problem. It was shameful to give birth out of wedlock, and if either parent had committed adultery resulting in the child, the death penalty could be applied. Consequently, people often attempted to conceal the pregnancy by killing the newborn. Concealing a pregnancy was relatively easy, as women’s skirts at the time were much wider than today’s miniskirts.
In earlier times, the death penalty alone did not seem sufficiently severe, as additional punishments were often administered alongside it. The convicted could be tortured, for example, by having their fingers crushed with pliers. Even in the Civil Code of 1734, it was stipulated that corporal punishment could precede execution. The executed person’s body could then be displayed publicly through “hanging out on stakes.”
Whipping and running the gauntlet were common punishments in earlier times. Running the gauntlet involved the convicted running between two lines of peasants armed with sticks and other striking implements, being beaten along the way. These punishments were abolished in the 18th century. The Civil Code of 1734 retained corporal punishment only as a more severe form of executing the death penalty. This form of corporal punishment was abolished in Finland’s Criminal Code of 1889. The death penalty in peacetime was abolished in 1949, and in wartime in 1972.
The provincial laws did not recognize imprisonment as a formal punishment. People were confined only while awaiting trial or execution. However, debtor’s prison existed for unpaid debts. Jail as a criminal punishment was introduced in Sweden/Finland by a constitution in 1624. It served as a less severe alternative to the death penalty and as a substitute for unpaid fines. The Civil Code of 1734 established jail not only as a substitute for unpaid fines but also as an alternative punishment to fines. The Criminal Code of 1889 distinguished two forms of imprisonment: jail and the correctional facility. The correctional facility differed mainly in harsher conditions. Prisoners there were more isolated, and serving such a sentence also entailed a temporary loss of civic trust after release. The correctional facility punishment was abolished in 1975.
Vasa 1.9.2016. L. Johansson