Sverige och rasdiskrimineringskonventionen - en undersökning av hur Sverige uppfyller art. 4(b) i ICERD
(2016) LAGF03 20162Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Sverige är sedan 1971 ansluten till FN-konventionen om avskaffande av alla former av rasdiskriminering. Konventionen tillkom som en reaktion mot rasdiskriminerande förtryck i form av apartheid och kolonialism.
Varje konventionsstat är enligt konventionens art. 4(b) skyldig att olagligförklara och förbjuda organisationer som främjar och uppmanar till rasdiskriminering. Trots upprepad kritik från konventionens övervakningsorgan CERD har Sverige ännu inte infört något sådant förbud i sin lagstiftning. Utöver kritiken från CERD har detta uppmärksammats i media, i samband med rapporteringar om främlingsfientliga gruppers framfart i Sverige.
Sverige har konsekvent hävdat att de uppfyller förpliktelserna i art. 4 genom straffbestämmelsen... (More) - Sverige är sedan 1971 ansluten till FN-konventionen om avskaffande av alla former av rasdiskriminering. Konventionen tillkom som en reaktion mot rasdiskriminerande förtryck i form av apartheid och kolonialism.
Varje konventionsstat är enligt konventionens art. 4(b) skyldig att olagligförklara och förbjuda organisationer som främjar och uppmanar till rasdiskriminering. Trots upprepad kritik från konventionens övervakningsorgan CERD har Sverige ännu inte infört något sådant förbud i sin lagstiftning. Utöver kritiken från CERD har detta uppmärksammats i media, i samband med rapporteringar om främlingsfientliga gruppers framfart i Sverige.
Sverige har konsekvent hävdat att de uppfyller förpliktelserna i art. 4 genom straffbestämmelsen hets mot folkgrupp, och i detta resonemang tar uppsatsen avstamp. I uppsatsen undersöks vilka förpliktelser art. 4 ålägger Sverige och hur Sverige uppfyller dessa, med fokus på lagstiftningen om hets mot folkgrupp. I detta syfte undersöks främst två motsatspar: konventionens regelverk och den svenska lagstiftningen, samt kritiken från CERD och Sveriges argumentation kring sina konventionsförpliktelser.
Uppsatsens slutsatser är att straffbestämmelsen hets mot folkgrupp inte i tillräckligt grad uppfyller konventionen. Detta beror i huvudsak på att art. 4(b) syftar till att olagligförklara rasistiska organisationer som sådana, medan hetsbrottet enbart förbjuder rasistiska handlingar. Vidare anses hetsbrottets tillämpningsområde inte vara tillräckligt omfattande för att indirekt uppnå syftet med ett förbud mot rasistiska organisationer, det vill säga hindra deras interna och externa verksamhet. (Less) - Abstract
- In 1971, Sweden ratified the United Nations convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. It was established as a reaction to racial oppression, such as apartheid and colonialism. All state parties are, under article 4, obliged to prohibit and criminalise organisations who in any way promote or encourage racial discrimination. Sweden has, in spite of criticism from the convention’s monitoring authority (CERD), not fulfilled the demands of the convention to adopt the aforementioned resolution into its own legal system. In addition to the criticism from CERD, Swedish media has also raised this issue in connection to the rise of xenophobic movements in the country. Sweden has consistently claimed that they fulfil the... (More)
- In 1971, Sweden ratified the United Nations convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. It was established as a reaction to racial oppression, such as apartheid and colonialism. All state parties are, under article 4, obliged to prohibit and criminalise organisations who in any way promote or encourage racial discrimination. Sweden has, in spite of criticism from the convention’s monitoring authority (CERD), not fulfilled the demands of the convention to adopt the aforementioned resolution into its own legal system. In addition to the criticism from CERD, Swedish media has also raised this issue in connection to the rise of xenophobic movements in the country. Sweden has consistently claimed that they fulfil the obligations in article 4 through the provision on agitation against a national or ethnic group in Chapter 16, Section 8 of the Swedish Penal Code, and these events form the basis of this thesis.
This thesis explores which obligations article 4 impose on Sweden and how the country fulfil these obligations, whereas focus of the thesis is on law regarding hate speech. The main purpose of the thesis is to explore the contradictory relation between the convention and Sweden’s law, as well as the criticism from CERD and Sweden’s stance regarding the obligations following the ratified convention.
The concluding remarks of this thesis are that the extent of the Swedish law is not enough to fulfil and cover a criminalisation and abolishment of racist organisations, which is to prevent those organisations internal as well as external operation. The claim that the regulation of hate speech does not, sufficiently enough, fulfil the convention, is supported by the findings of this thesis. This shortcoming is due to the Swedish law that only criminalises racism and hate speech as actions, as opposed to article 4(b) which has the purpose of criminalising racist organisations. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8897146
- author
- Ahlqvist, Julia LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20162
- year
- 2016
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Folkrätt, rasdiskrimineringskonventionen, hets mot folkgrupp
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8897146
- date added to LUP
- 2017-02-04 16:54:50
- date last changed
- 2017-02-04 16:54:50
@misc{8897146,
abstract = {{In 1971, Sweden ratified the United Nations convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. It was established as a reaction to racial oppression, such as apartheid and colonialism. All state parties are, under article 4, obliged to prohibit and criminalise organisations who in any way promote or encourage racial discrimination. Sweden has, in spite of criticism from the convention’s monitoring authority (CERD), not fulfilled the demands of the convention to adopt the aforementioned resolution into its own legal system. In addition to the criticism from CERD, Swedish media has also raised this issue in connection to the rise of xenophobic movements in the country. Sweden has consistently claimed that they fulfil the obligations in article 4 through the provision on agitation against a national or ethnic group in Chapter 16, Section 8 of the Swedish Penal Code, and these events form the basis of this thesis.
This thesis explores which obligations article 4 impose on Sweden and how the country fulfil these obligations, whereas focus of the thesis is on law regarding hate speech. The main purpose of the thesis is to explore the contradictory relation between the convention and Sweden’s law, as well as the criticism from CERD and Sweden’s stance regarding the obligations following the ratified convention.
The concluding remarks of this thesis are that the extent of the Swedish law is not enough to fulfil and cover a criminalisation and abolishment of racist organisations, which is to prevent those organisations internal as well as external operation. The claim that the regulation of hate speech does not, sufficiently enough, fulfil the convention, is supported by the findings of this thesis. This shortcoming is due to the Swedish law that only criminalises racism and hate speech as actions, as opposed to article 4(b) which has the purpose of criminalising racist organisations.}},
author = {{Ahlqvist, Julia}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Sverige och rasdiskrimineringskonventionen - en undersökning av hur Sverige uppfyller art. 4(b) i ICERD}},
year = {{2016}},
}