The Emotional Interaction of Judicial Objectivity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1031Keywords:
Emotion management, empathy, objectivity, impartiality, Swedish courts, legal professionals, tacit signals, emotional communicationAbstract
Like other Western legal systems, the Swedish legal system constructs objectivity as an unemotional state of being. We argue that the enactment of objectivity in situ relies on objectivity work including emotion management and empathy. Building on qualitative interviews and observations in Swedish district courts, we analyse courtroom interaction through a dramaturgical lens, highlighting tacit signals and interprofessional emotional communication aimed to secure objective procedures, while sustaining the ideal of unemotional objectivity. By analytically separating objectivity from impartiality, we show that judges’ objective performances balance empathic attunement and restrained expressions to uphold an impartial presentation. Prosecutors take pride in maintaining objectivity in spite of being partial, fostering the ability to switch between engagement and disengagement depending on the strength of the case. The requirement for legal professionals to be autonomous demands skillful inter-professional emotional attuning. Thereby, collaborative professional emotion management achieves the ideal of justice as being objective.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF 320
References
Alvesson, M., and Sköldberg, K., 2009. Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
Archer, M.S., 2000. Being Human: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge University Press.
Barbalet, J., 1998. Emotion, Social Theory, and Social Structure – A Macrosociological Approach. Cambridge University Press.
Barbalet, J., 2011. Emotions beyond regulation: Backgrounded emotions in science and trust. Emotion Review [online], 3(1), 36-43. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073910380968 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Bergman Blix, S., 2015. Professional emotion management as a rehearsal process. Professions and Professionalism [online], 5(2), 1-15. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7577/pp.1322 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Bergman Blix, S., and Wettergren, Å., 2015. The emotional labour of gaining and maintaining access to the field. Qualitative Research [online], 15(6), 688–704. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114561348 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Bergman Blix, S., and Wettergren, Å., 2016. A sociological perspective on emotions in the judiciary. Emotion Review [online], 8(1), 32-37. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073915601226 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Bergman Blix, S., and Wettergren, Å., 2018. Professional Emotions in Court: A Sociological Perspective. London: Routledge.
Bladini, M., 2013. I objektivitetens sken: En kritisk granskning av objektivitetsideal, objektivitetsanspråk och legitimeringsstrategier i diskurser om dömande i brottmål [In the semblance of objectivity - a critical review of objectivity claims and legitimation strategies in criminal trial discourses]. Göteborg: Makadam.
Burkitt, I., 2012. Emotional reflexivity: Feeling, emotion and imagination in reflexive dialogues. Sociology [online], 46(3), 458-72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511422587 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Clark, C., 1990. Emotions and micropolitics in everyday life: Some patterns and paradoxes of “place”. In: T.D. Kemper, ed., Research Agendas in the Sociology of Emotions. State University of New York Press, 305-33.
Dahlberg, L., 2009. Emotional tropes in the courtroom: On representation of affect and emotion in legal court proceedings. Nordic Theatre Studies, 21, 129-52.
Darbyshire, P., 2011. Sitting in Judgment: The Working Lives of Judges. Oxford: Hart.
Daston, L., and Galison, P., 2010. Objectivity. Paperback ed. New York: Zone Books.
Flower, L., 2018. Doing loyalty: Defense lawyers’ subtle dramas in the courtroom. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography [online], 47(2), 226-54. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241616646826 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Forsgren, M., 2014. Opartiska domare och effektiv resurshantering [Impartial judges and an efficent use of resources]. Svensk Juristtidning [Swedish Law Journal] (online), vol. 3, 217-25. Available from: https://svjt.se/svjt/2014/217 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Goffman, E., 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
Goffman, E., 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
Goodrum, S., 2013. Bridging the gap between prosecutors’ cases and victims’ biographies in the criminal justice system through shared emotions. Law and Social Inquiry [online], 38(2), 257-87. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12020 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Harris, L.C., 2002. The emotional labour of barrister: An exploration of emotional labour by status professionals. Journal of Management Studies [online], 39(4), 553-84. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.t01-1-00303 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Herzog-Evans, M., 2014. French Reentry Courts and Rehabilitation: Mister Jourdain of Desistance. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Heuman, L., 2007. Objectivity in Swedish criminal proceedings. Scandinavian Studies in Law [online], 51, 213-28. Available from: http://www.scandinavianlaw.se/pdf/51-10.pdf [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Hochschild, A.R., 1983. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hochschild, A.R., 1990. Ideology and emotion management: A perspective and path for future research. In: T.D. Kemper, ed., Research Agendas in the Sociology of Emotions. State University of New York Press, 117-45.
Jacobsson, K., 2008. “We can't just do it any which way”: Objectivity work among swedish prosecutors. Qualitative Sociology Review [online], 4(1), 46-68. Available from: http://www.qualitativesociologyreview.org/ENG/Volume9/QSR_4_1_Jacobsson_old.pdf [Accessed 2 April 2019].
James, W., 1879. The sentiment of rationality. Mind, 4(15), 317-46.
Kjelby, G.J., 2015. Some aspects of and perspectives on the public prosecutor’s objectivity according to ECTHR case-law. Bergen Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice [online], 3(1), 61-83. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15845/bjclcj.v3i1.828 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Lange, B., 2002. The emotional dimension in legal regulation. Journal of Law and Society [online], 29(1), 197-225. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6478.00216 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Luntley, M., 1995. Reason, Truth, and Self: The Postmodern Reconditioned. New York: Routledge.
Maroney, T.A., 2011. The persistent cultural script of judicial dispassion. California Law Review [online], 99, 629-81. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38K98M [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Maroney, T.A., 2012. Angry judges. Vanderbilt Law Review [online], 65(5), 1207-86. Available from: https://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/2012/10/angry-judges/ [Accessed 2 April 2019].
McDonald, S., 2005. Studying actions in context: A qualitative shadowing method for organizational research. Qualitative Research [online], 5(4), 455-73. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056923 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Moorhead, R., 2007. The passive arbiter: Litigants in person and the challenge to neutrality. Social & Legal Studies [online], 16(3), 405-24. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663907079766 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Poder, P., 2010. Empowerment as interactions that generate self-confidence – an emotion-sociological analysis of organizational empowerment. In: B. Sieben and Å. Wettergren, eds., Emotionalizing Organizations and Organizing Emotions. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Reddy, W., 2001. The Navigation of Feeling: A Framework for the History of Emotions. Cambridge University Press.
Roach Anleu, S., and Mack, K., 2005. Magistrates’ everyday work and emotional labour. Journal of Law and Society [online], 32(4), 590-614. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2005.00339.x [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Roach Anleu, S., and Mack, K., 2017. Performing Judicial Authority in the Lower Courts. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Roach Anleu, S., and Mack, K., 2019. Impartiality and emotion in everyday judicial practice. In: R. Patulny et al., eds., Emotions in Late Modernity. Abingdon: Routledge.
Rogers, L.J., and Erez, E., 1999. The contextuality of objectivity in sentencing among legal professionals in South Australia. International Journal of the Sociology of Law [online], 27(3), 267-86. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0194659599900928 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Scarduzio, J.A., 2011. Maintaining order through deviance? The emotional deviance, power, and professional work of municipal court judges. Management Communication Quarterly [online], 25(2), 283-310. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318910386446 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Seidman, S., ed., 1997. The Postmodern Turn: New Perspectives on Social Theory. Cambridge University Press.
von Wright, G.H., 1986. Vetenskapen och förnuftet. Stockholm: Bonnier.
Weber, M., 1995. Den protestantiska etiken och kapitalismens anda. Trans.: A. Lundquist. Lund: Argos.
Wettergren, Å., 2019. Emotive-cognitive rationality, background emotions and emotion work. In: A. Bellocchi et al., eds., Emotions in Late Modernity. London: Routledge.
Wettergren, Å., and Bergman Blix, S., 2016. Empathy and objectivity in the legal process: The case of Swedish prosecutors. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention [online], 17(1), 19-35. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14043858.2015.1136501 [Accessed 2 April 2019].
Wolcott, H.F., 1994. Transforming Qualitative Data: Description, Analysis, and Interpretation. London: Sage.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Stina Bergman Blix, Åsa Wettergren
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
