Within the ASG ”Oaths and Courts – from Forum to the Future” at the Lund University Pufendorf Institute for Advanced Studies, a group of researchers working within law, history, legal history, ancient history, theology and languages (Latin and Greek) gather. The independence and impartiality of judges, and the ambition to find the truth through judicial proceedings, have been defined by different types of oaths from Antiquity and onwards. In the ASG, we discuss how we can understand these legal oaths today, what they mean and what role they play in finding the truth and for the independence and impartiality of judges. And what do the standards of independence and impartiality mean when AI becomes part of decision-making?
The right to a fair trial is a fundamental human right. It is not only a right on its own, but it also provides individuals with an avenue to enforce other human rights. The right to a fair trial is, for example, described in art. 6 ECHR as the right to a ‘fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.’ Art. 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides everyone with the right ‘to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal’. The right to a fair trial is also defined in many constitutions. The right has been further defined in many judgments from the European Court of Human Rights.
In ancient Greece, oaths of judges are known from the 4th century B.C. Judges then swore to vote in accordance with the laws and decrees of the Athenian people, to listen to both parties equally, and to judge with their most just judgment without favour or hostility. These are standards that we still recognise as part of the right to a fair trial. In the period from 1150 to 1250, when judges and lawyers were in a process of professionalisation, oaths were an important part of the transition. In the 1230s, oaths for lawyers were formulated in France, England and Sicily. Lawyers should swear that they should not present unjust cases and that they should be loyal to their clients. This was a development of the Roman calumny oath. Furthermore, oaths for judges were formulated in the same decade in the German empire and in Sicily. Judges should swear that they should not hand down wrongful judgments, neither because of love nor hate, prayer nor reward, fear nor favour. These phrases then spread all over Europe and traces can be seen in the historical development of oaths of judges in many jurisdictions, often still today.
During the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period, the correct behaviour of a judge was not only communicated through oaths but also with the help of images. In town halls, such as in Siena in Italy, in Monsaraz in Portugal, and in Gdansk in Poland, there are allegories from the 14th -16th centuries of good and bad government or the good and bad judge. Also in legal manuscripts, the good judge and the fair trial could be shown and contrasted to the deceitful judge. In this way, the desired behaviour was clarified.
One example from a manuscript is from the mid-14th century. Maria Alessandra Bilotta (Lisbon), art historian specialised in medieval legal manuscripts, explained during a seminar 7th March 2025 how emperor Justinian as a judge is surrounded by six virtues, three on either side, representing caritas – charity (looking upwards and holding parchment scrolls, one upwards with the three first commandments and one downwards with the other seven commandments), temperantia – temperance (holding a locked castle where vices are kept), fortitude – strength (holding a lion in its jaws), prudentia – wisdom (holding a circle or mirror with a book, and symbols of day and night), fides – faith (holding a tree in which are hanging 15 medallions representing the declaration of confession) and spes – hope (holding an anchor). Justinian himself symbolises the virtue of justice. Below are people with gifts, and as the judge refuses bribery, justice is incorruptible. A soldier is cutting the head of someone as an exemplum for the people, also reminding us about the development in human rights as the prohibition of capital punishment was, for example, not even included in the original version of the European Convention of Human Rights but added later.
The seminar 7th March 2025 was financed through seed money from the Human Rights profile area and the theme was The Right to a Fair Trial – Historical Foundations. Besides Maria Alessandra Bilotta’s contribution, Camilla Marangoni (Rome/Torino) presented her research on images from illuminated legal manuscripts, using the ICONCLASS taxonomy of iconography. A recurring motif in medieval manuscripts is that persons have taken off a glove and are holding it in the other hand. The detail is present in marriage scenes but also other contexts. What symbolic rule does such a detail have there? In some cases, it might symbolise oath taking.
As regards oaths, Vojtech Vladár (Bratislava) presented the development of oaths in the medieval romano-canonical procedure and related it to the ordeals, i.e. tests of guilt or innocence through interference by God. Also in oaths, God was invoked as a guarantor for truth-telling. Janko Paunovic (Vienna) presented various 12th-14th century oaths from Kotor in today’s Montenegro, showing that judges there had to swear not to help their friends or harm their enemies and that they should judge in good faith and without deceit. This aligns well with oaths in other jurisdictions and contributes to the understanding of the diffusion of ethical standards for judges in the Middle Ages. Raffaella Bianchi Riva (Milan) discussed the oaths of advocates in the Middle Ages, and how they handled the dual role of the legal profession: advocates want to win the case and have a duty of loyalty to their clients, but on the other hand, they may not promote injustice. Oath of advocates can also have a political function: as means of control which can hamper their independence.
Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde (Oslo) presented the four daughters of God referred to in Norwegian Medieval law as a means to solve the problem of corruption during the transmission from a kindred to a state society in Norway in the 13th century. The four daughters of God were the four virtues mercy, verity, justice and peace, and against them stood the four bastards of the Devil, which were the vices fear, avarice, enmity and friendship. This illustrates – just as the oaths and the imagery in town halls and manuscripts – the ethical standard of judges.
Altogether, the seminar provided us with deepened knowledge about different aspects of the history of the right to a fair trial. It reinforced our view that the ethical standards of judges and advocates have long histories but are complex and difficult to apply, and therefore they are adapted and renegotiated as societies change. The core values, however, as the independence and impartiality in the judge’s mind, remains intact as an ideal over the centuries. This means that history is not only interesting in its own right but also provides us with examples useful here and now.
The seminar also formed a base for continued thinking of ways to develop our common interests centering around oaths and courts. The topic could be widened to analyse how oaths have functioned as means to safeguard good governance, something that could also be connected to historic images. On the other hand, the topic could be widened to comprise times of transitions – what role do oaths to the constitution and other oaths have when a society transitions from one type of regime to another. An ongoing discussion is also how ethical standards for judges and advocates are adapted to the use of AI technology for analysing and presenting evidence and assessing facts and law.
Martin Sunnqvist is a professor of legal history at the Faculty of Law, Lund University and a member of the Human Rights Profile Area. On the 16th of May 2025, Martin will give a presentation on the ASG during Human Rights Lunch Online. You can read more about Martin’s research on the research portal.
