Norway Ranks First in Judicial Trust: "Citizens as Judges"

According to the 2024 institutional trust survey released by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Norway had the highest level of public trust in its judicial system, at 77%. In contrast, South Korea's judicial trust stood at just 33%, significantly lower than the average of 54% among the 30 countries surveyed.

Why does Norway enjoy more than double the level of trust compared to South Korea? The answer lies in its unique criminal justice system. Norway operates a system of 'Lay participation,' in which ordinary citizens are directly involved in trials, making decisions on both guilt and sentencing. In both the first-instance and appellate courts, 'lay judges' in Norway play a central role and exercise the same authority as professional judges.

The trial panel of the City or District Court, which handles the first instance of criminal cases, is generally composed of one professional judge and two lay judges. For serious crimes or highly complex cases, a mixed panel of two professional judges and three lay judges is formed. Within these mixed panels, it is a principle to maintain gender balance as much as possible.

원본보기 아이콘

Lay judges are granted significant authority. In every area-including fact-finding, determining guilt or innocence, and deciding sentences-they hold the same powers as professional judges. While the actual proceedings are led by the professional judge, the lay judges can overturn the professional judge’s decisions through majority rule.

After the trial concludes, the judges deliberate in private. Although the professional judge leads the discussion and provides legal guidance, such as explaining the significance of evidence, decisions of guilt are made by majority vote, which means the lay judges can overrule the professional judge.

The written judgment includes both majority and minority opinions, reflecting the perspectives of the lay judges as well. The grounds for the decision on guilt or innocence and the reasons for sentencing are presented in detail in the judgment.

Lay judges also participate in the appeals process. Under the Criminal Procedure Act revised in 2017, the appellate mixed panel is composed of two professional judges and five lay judges. A majority of at least five must agree to reach a guilty verdict. However, there is no lay participation system in the Supreme Court, the highest court.

A high-ranking judge stated, "In a situation where public trust in the judiciary is low, introducing a lay judge system in which citizens themselves participate as judges could, in itself, be a way to improve judicial trust," adding, "While institutional reforms would be necessary, it is worth considering which direction we should take."

Suyoun Park, The Law Times reporter

Jisoo Kim, The Law Times reporter

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.