Cultural Expertise in Sweden: A History of Its Use

Abstract

This paper is a case study of the use of cultural experts, broadly defined as including mediators and academicians with a variety of backgrounds, in Sweden. It draws on data collected through qualitative interviews with cultural experts, by following court cases through legal documents, mass media and other printed material, and by my own experience as a cultural expert. The paper provides a context to the potential application of the concept of cultural expertise regarding the appointment of such experts by lawyers, prosecutors and courts. It analyzes cases concerning the Sami, the Roma and recent immigrants from Africa and Asia. The Sami cases revolve around conflicts with the Swedish state over rights and ownership. The Roma cases revolve around questions of ethnic discrimination. Cases of immigrants from outside Europe consist of individual criminal cases and asylum. I argue that Swedish ideas-and ideals-of sameness and equality have had an impact on the legal cases that I discuss in this paper. While the legal issues in each of these cases differ, the paper argues that they demonstrate a similarity in how Swedish-majority society manages and even creates cultural differences. I conclude by showing the ways culture, rights, and obligations are understood in courts reflect mainstream trends of Swedish society and suggest the need for cultural expertise in the form of interdisciplinary collaboration.

Interrogating the Role and Value of Cultural Expertise in Law

“…R. Campbell 2017J. R. Campbell , 2020a, the U.S.A. (Berger et al 2015;Ngin 2018) and Sweden (Rabo 2019). Anthropological evidence/CE is likely to be of value in asylum proceedings for two reasons.…”

“…The majority of judges and lawyers had used experts in less than 10 cases. Rabo (2019) sets out a more nuanced history of CE in Swedish law in which she examines cases concerned with the land rights of the indigenous Sami people, cases of discrimination against Roma people and cases-concerned with deportation, adoption, hate speech, divorce, spirit possession, FGM and murder-involving 'new immigrants'. She notes that the Swedish courts employ the 'free sifting/consideration of evidence (fri bevisprovning)' which, in principle, means that there are 'no limitations concerning the sources that can be used by the parties in a trial' (p. 2).…”