Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Otillåtet åtkommen bevisning - en analys av den straffprocessuella hanteringen och upprätthållandet av mänskliga rättigheter

Karlsson, Petronella LU (2018) JURM02 20182
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
In most democratic countries, the citizens are granted freedoms and rights through the country’s constitution. This regulates and limits the state’s exercise of power over the citizens and sets the frame for the criminal law. In Sweden the principle of free evaluation of evidence is detrimental to the law of evidence, meaning that there are no specific laws regulating the evidence used in a trial, nor how the court should value that evidence. The goverment’s interest in crime preventing sometimes results in evidence being gathered through methods that violate a person’s rights.

In the essay, the relationship between the free evaluation of evidence and the protection of rights is investigated. National law is presented in relation to the... (More)
In most democratic countries, the citizens are granted freedoms and rights through the country’s constitution. This regulates and limits the state’s exercise of power over the citizens and sets the frame for the criminal law. In Sweden the principle of free evaluation of evidence is detrimental to the law of evidence, meaning that there are no specific laws regulating the evidence used in a trial, nor how the court should value that evidence. The goverment’s interest in crime preventing sometimes results in evidence being gathered through methods that violate a person’s rights.

In the essay, the relationship between the free evaluation of evidence and the protection of rights is investigated. National law is presented in relation to the treatment of illegally obtained evidence with regards to those criteria that are set in ECHR article 6 right to a fair trial. By applying comparative aspects to constitutionalism, protection of rights and law of evidence, national law is put in a context that lays the foundation for a valuation of how satisfying the law is from the aspect of protecting the individual’s rights. The basis of the analysis is the discussion whether the criminal procedure should act in the interest of combatting crime or legal certainty.

The essay shows that Sweden’s comparatively small constitutionalism combined with the free evaluation of evidence has negative consequences for the protection of rights in the criminal procedure. The author concludes that the Swedish function of the criminal procedure is to combat crime when it comes to how illegally obtained evidence is treated. Since the protection of rights is constitutionally based, the author argues that the current system is not satisfactory and that a regulation regarding the treatment of illegally obtained evidence should be established to the Swedish legal system in favor of the interest of legal certainty. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
I de flesta länder med ett demokratiskt styrelseskick tillförsäkras medborgarna individuella fri- och rättigheter genom landets konstitution. Detta reglerar och begränsar statens maktutövning gentemot medborgarna och sätter ramarna för bland annat straffrätten. I Sverige präglas bevisrätten av principen om fri bevisprövning, vilket innebär att det saknas lagreglering kring vilka bevis som får åberopas i en rättegång och hur domstolen ska värdera desamma. Statens brottsutredningsintresse får ibland till följd att bevisning åtkoms genom åtgärder som innebär en otillåten kränkning av tillförsäkrade rättigheter.

I uppsatsen utreds förhållandet mellan den fria bevisrätten och upprätthållandet av rättighetsskyddet. Nationell rätt kartläggs... (More)
I de flesta länder med ett demokratiskt styrelseskick tillförsäkras medborgarna individuella fri- och rättigheter genom landets konstitution. Detta reglerar och begränsar statens maktutövning gentemot medborgarna och sätter ramarna för bland annat straffrätten. I Sverige präglas bevisrätten av principen om fri bevisprövning, vilket innebär att det saknas lagreglering kring vilka bevis som får åberopas i en rättegång och hur domstolen ska värdera desamma. Statens brottsutredningsintresse får ibland till följd att bevisning åtkoms genom åtgärder som innebär en otillåten kränkning av tillförsäkrade rättigheter.

I uppsatsen utreds förhållandet mellan den fria bevisrätten och upprätthållandet av rättighetsskyddet. Nationell rätt kartläggs avseende hanteringen av otillåtet åtkommen bevisning, med beaktande av de krav som EKMR art. 6 om rätten till en rättvis rättegång ställer. Genom att tillföra komparativa aspekter på konstitutionalism, rättighetsskydd och bevisrätt, sätts nationell rätt i en kontext som utgör underlag för en värdering av hur tillfredställande ordningen är ur rättighetsaspekt. Analysen tar sin teoretiska utgångspunkt i diskussionen kring huruvida straffprocessen främst har en funktion som brottsbekämpande eller rättssäker.

Framställningen visar att Sveriges jämförelsevis svaga konstitutionalism i kombination med den fria bevisrätten, får negativa konsekvenser för upprätthållandet av rättighetsskyddet i straffprocessen. Författaren konstaterar att den svenska straffprocessen intar en klart brottsbekämpande funktion när det handlar om hur otillåtet åtkommen bevisning hanteras. Mot bakgrund av att rättighetsskyddet är konstitutionellt tillförsäkrat, argumenterar författaren för att nu rådande ordning är icke tillfredställande och att en reglering kring användningen av otillåtet åtkommen bevisning bör införas i svensk rätt till förmån för rättssäkerhetsintresset. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Karlsson, Petronella LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Illegally obtained evidence - an analysis of the treatment in the criminal procedure and the maintenance of human rights
course
JURM02 20182
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
straffrätt, statsrätt, rättsvetenskap
language
Swedish
id
8965630
date added to LUP
2019-01-28 11:29:43
date last changed
2019-01-28 11:29:43
@misc{8965630,
  abstract     = {{In most democratic countries, the citizens are granted freedoms and rights through the country’s constitution. This regulates and limits the state’s exercise of power over the citizens and sets the frame for the criminal law. In Sweden the principle of free evaluation of evidence is detrimental to the law of evidence, meaning that there are no specific laws regulating the evidence used in a trial, nor how the court should value that evidence. The goverment’s interest in crime preventing sometimes results in evidence being gathered through methods that violate a person’s rights.

In the essay, the relationship between the free evaluation of evidence and the protection of rights is investigated. National law is presented in relation to the treatment of illegally obtained evidence with regards to those criteria that are set in ECHR article 6 right to a fair trial. By applying comparative aspects to constitutionalism, protection of rights and law of evidence, national law is put in a context that lays the foundation for a valuation of how satisfying the law is from the aspect of protecting the individual’s rights. The basis of the analysis is the discussion whether the criminal procedure should act in the interest of combatting crime or legal certainty.

The essay shows that Sweden’s comparatively small constitutionalism combined with the free evaluation of evidence has negative consequences for the protection of rights in the criminal procedure. The author concludes that the Swedish function of the criminal procedure is to combat crime when it comes to how illegally obtained evidence is treated. Since the protection of rights is constitutionally based, the author argues that the current system is not satisfactory and that a regulation regarding the treatment of illegally obtained evidence should be established to the Swedish legal system in favor of the interest of legal certainty.}},
  author       = {{Karlsson, Petronella}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Otillåtet åtkommen bevisning - en analys av den straffprocessuella hanteringen och upprätthållandet av mänskliga rättigheter}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}