At the judges’ association, it sounds from chairman Mikael Sjöberg that the representatives of the judiciary must think about when they maneuver in the digital debate universe.
– People need to know that we approach matters impartially and have no preconceived notions. You run that risk when you go in and comment on debate posts, says Mikael Sjöberg to Jyllands-Posten.
Søren Holm Seerup was at the head of the jury that on Friday sentenced the Danish People’s Party’s deputy chairman, Morten Messerschmidt, to six months’ conditional imprisonment for forgery and fraud with EU support.
Subsequently, another Søren with the surname Pind – the former left-wing minister – wrote a post on Facebook. According to Ekstra Bladet, the message here was that the DF should not continue as deputy chairman of the party. A post Søren Holm Seerup subsequently liked.
Messerschmidt’s lawyer, Peter Trudsø, told Berlingske over the weekend that he would now, on behalf of his client, complain about Judge Seerup to the Special Court of Appeal.
According to Jyllands-Posten, Judge Seerup has the support of Mikael Sjöberg, who, however, says that he would not have done the same himself.
– I do not have the slightest evidence to believe that my colleague should be biased. But that’s why I still think you have to think about, says Mikael Sjöberg to the newspaper.
It was Ekstra Bladet who initially wrote about Judge Seerup’s like. After the newspaper approached the judge, he chose to delete his like.
The Special Court of Appeal, which is to deal with the complaint against Søren Holm Seerup, cannot decide whether the case should go ahead. The case is being appealed to the Eastern High Court.
The High Court may, in due course, when the appeal is to be decided, choose to refer the case back to the district court for reconsideration.
The Court of Appeal only has the opportunity to express its disapproval of the judge’s conduct if the Court of Appeal finds this inappropriate.