Search

The purpose of this article is to explore perceptions and assessments of lay participation in Norway during a historic time of transition away from all‐layperson juries. This study consisted of sixteen months of court observation and interviews with judges, prosecutors, former lay decision makers, defense attorneys, and other contributors to the country's longstanding jury debate. My ethnographic research demonstrates that all‐layperson juries in Norway face practical and procedural checks that differentiate them from Anglo‐American juries, among others. For this reason, legal professionals in Norway evince confidence that mixed courts of lay and professional citizens can facilitate fair case outcomes. A central finding from this research is that comparative analyses of all‐layperson juries and mixed courts require attention to the social specificity of the states that support such systems. To this end, lay participation in Norway challenges the conventional wisdom that jurors have greater independence and control over case outcomes than lay judges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Trade Organization ( WTO) arguably shapes regulatory governance in more countries to a greater extent than any other international organization. This article provides a new framework for assessing the broader transnational regulatory implications of the WTO as part of a transnational legal order ( TLO) in terms of four dimensions of regulatory change that permeate the state: (i) changes in the boundary between the market and the state (involving concomitantly market liberalization and growth of the administrative state); (ii) changes in the relative authority of institutions within the state (promoting bureaucratized and judicialized governance); (iii) changes in professional expertise engaging with state regulation (such as the role of lawyers); and (iv) changes in normative frames and accountability mechanisms for national regulation (which are trade liberal and transnational in scope). In practice, these four dimensions of change interact and build on each other. The article presents what we know to date and a framework for conducting further study of such transnational legal ordering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The debate over the legalisation of voluntary euthanasia is most often seen to be the result of three changes in society: individualisation, diminished taboos concerning death and changes in the balance of power in medicine. The fact that these changes occurred in many western countries but led to legalisation in only a few makes this claim problematic. I examine whether socio-legal propositions, with respect to the emergence of laws which focus on social control, offer a better approach to understanding the development of rules allowing and governing euthanasia. After a short sketch of the history of the Dutch law regulating euthanasia, I discuss these three societal changes in the light of shifts in the social control of medical behaviour that shortens life. I show that the Dutch relaxation of the prohibition of euthanasia goes together with new forms of social control: doctors’ self control is complemented with second-party control (by patients), professional third-party control and governmental control. My work calls attention to the fact that bioethics is part of larger systems of social control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research Summary [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]