In the course of the autumn, the prosecutor’s office and lawyers, expressed criticism of each other. The criticism has been, in both cases, that have been sweeping and have given a general view of lawyers behaving badly in the courtroom and on social media sites, while the public prosecutor run amok, and can’t be criticized if they go over the limit. This is a picture that we don’t know very well. Furthermore, we feel that it is unfortunate that the general public is likely to believe that there are significant weaknesses in the prosecutor’s office and their way of carrying out the work.
chapter 8 code
there are rules for attorneys at law.
In the code there are also rules concerning the public defender. The bar association regulates lawyers ‚ conduct, by the Guiding rules of good advokatsed as well as the guidelines of the board of directors, and the practice of the board. It is, in other words, a framework that captures the behaviour of the lawyers who misconduct themselves. If a lawyer is guilty of serious misconduct, the court, client, counterparty, or any other relevant report to the board, which then hears the complaint.
in Addition, the secretary-general with an opportunity to take the initiative to ensure that cases are heard in the tribunal, if it comes to her knowledge of any misconduct, and the board of directors decides to refer the matter to the board. The board may assign a lawyer’s misconduct as a reminder, a warning, a warning with a financial penalty or exclude the possibility of the lawyer. The average excludes the two attorneys per year. This, of Sweden, about 6,000 lawyers.
by the rules of professional misconduct, on the one hand a disciplinansvar in which the State ansvarsnämnd able to decide on the dismissal or loss of pay. In addition, as may the Chancellor of justice and the parliamentary Ombudsman on his own initiative or following a complaint from the public, reviewing the prosecutors ‚ work and, where necessary, express criticism of the prosecution. The attorney-general has, in addition, the internal regulator which, in a similar way to the review, that the prosecutor, in compliance with the rules that apply as well as the attorney general may, when necessary, express criticism. The decision on coercive measures in the form of arrests and detentions, and seizures, can be dealt with by a court of law.
the picture of the actual situation, however, is that the vast majority of the public prosecutor and the judiciary carry out their work in a creditable manner, and with a great deal of respect for each other’s roles. Prosecutors are trying on the basis of the resources available to conduct the investigations promptly and impartially. The attorneys strive to represent their clients in a proper manner and protect the client’s best interest.
and, of Course, there is a built-in conflict in these roles. In a conflict in which both public prosecutors and lawyers have a responsibility to deal in a professional manner. It is our hope that both the prosecutor and the lawyers to a greater extent be able to talk with each other, as are the views of the other person’s behaviour in each individual case. If that doesn’t work, it may be a good idea to leave the issue to the line manager at the relevant district, and one of the senior partners at your current firm.
This may also be the reason for the public Prosecutor’s office and the Bar association to consider whether they should expand the education and training of their respective prosecutors ‚ work.
in Particular, both the prosecutor and the attorneys have a responsibility to provide the public with an accurate picture of the excellent work that is carried out on a daily basis by both attorneys that the office of the prosecutor. Therefore, let us now restrain the debate and bring the conversation into a calmer and more constructive tone. It paves the way for you, and in addition, it is important for us to maintain the public’s trust.
<
