The court of Athens was one of the most important democratic organs of this Greek policy. At its core, it was a jury trial. It was called the “dicasterium” or “helium” (from the name of the agora - the market square where the meetings were held). Hence the titles of judges - savages and heliasts. About how sentences were passed by the Athens court, the article tells.
Member Election
According to legend, helium was formed in ancient times (approximately in the 7th-6th centuries BC) under Solon, the Athenian legislator, politician and poet. Especially the role of the court and its influence on the life of the state and society increased in the 5th-4th centuries BC.
The number of helium members who were elected reached six thousand. These were supposed to be persons at least 30 years old, with a good reputation, a certain life experience and a wealth of knowledge, usually having a family.
Trial Chambers
The Athenian jury was divided into 10 chambers called dikasteries. In each of them there were 600 people, of which 500 were engaged in the analysis of cases, and 100 were in stock. The researchers explain such a large number of court members and chambers by the fact that in such a large city-state as Athens, there were a lot of diverse cases.
But there is another assumption, according to which, there was a desire to avoid bribing representatives of the judiciary. After all, bribing thousands of judges is quite difficult, especially since the cases between the chambers were distributed according to the lot.
When a case of special importance happened, it was discussed at a joint meeting of two or three chambers. The Athenian court was the highest judicial authority with very broad competence. In fact, he helped the public assembly, reducing its workload and thereby complementing this management structure.
Trial
Unlike the later courts, the court in the Athenian state did not have specialized prosecutors and defense attorneys. Both of these functions were carried out privately. The prosecutor wrote a statement addressed to the relevant magistrate and brought the accused to him. The magistrate conducted a preliminary investigation, then transferred the case to helium and presided over the chamber during its analysis.
The fundamental principle of the trial was adversarial. First, the accusing party presented its claims and their justification, then the defendant entered into a dispute, refuting the charges. After hearing the plaintiff and defendant, the judges proceeded to the vote. A decision was considered adopted if more than half the votes of the members of the chamber were cast for it. After that, the defendant was either declared innocent or punished.
As a punishment, imprisonment, confiscation of property, and a monetary fine could be applied. The most severe species were:
- the death penalty;
- exile to a foreign land;
- deprivation of civil rights.
Equality of votes was seen as an acquittal.
Illegal Complaints
In addition to the Athens court hearing litigation, he had another crucial task - to protect the Athenian democracy system as a whole. So, for example, there was a special kind of proceedings designed to protect the Athenian constitution, which was called "complaints of illegality."
Its essence was as follows. Each citizen had the right to make a statement that a law adopted by the National Assembly was contrary to the law or published from it, violating the established procedure.
Since the receipt of such a statement, the action of the appealed law was subject to suspension. In helium, there was a special chamber, headed by an archon, which proceeded to a thorough examination of the complaint.
If her justice was recognized, the appealed law was repealed. As for his author, he was not waiting for a bright prospect. Even the death penalty, as well as a very large fine or exile, could be applied to him.
The existence of the opportunity to file the complaint described above was a very effective measure to prevent the introduction of rash bills in the National Assembly. However, if it turned out that the complaint was unsubstantiated, its proponent was held liable for lawlessness.
Competence and professionalism of judges
It was possible to be elected to the Athens court several times. This contributed to the fact that the judges gained experience in managing cases, increased their professionalism, and increased competence. Trials in helium took place with the participation of magistrates, for example, the archon (the highest official in the state) or the strategist (commander in chief of the troops) could preside in one chamber or another. They could also conduct a preliminary investigation.
Thus, the Athenian judicial system was carefully thought out and developed, and experienced judges were members of the helium. There were effective anti-bribery measures. All this allowed the judicial system of the city-state to be one of the most important foundations of a democratic system. Even political opponents of Athenian democracy had to recognize the competence and objectivity of helium members.