Oaktsam våldtäkt - en komparativ studie av svensk och norsk rätt
(2010) JURM01 20102Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Våldtäktsbrottet har, inom svensk rätt, genomgått omfattande förändringar de senaste decennierna. Begreppet har breddats och kommit att innefatta allt fler sexuella handlingar. Utvecklingen har följts av omfattande diskussioner samt medialt omdebatterade domar. Den så kallade samtyckesregleringen, där rekvisiten våld och hot avskaffas till förmån för ett bristande samtycke, har haft en central position i diskussionen. En samtyckesreglering skulle främst ta sikte på situationer där en sexuell handling utförts mot någons vilja, men utan att våld eller hot kunnat visas. En diskussion som dock i princip helt uteblivit, är den om en eventuell sänkning av skuldkravet.
Det flesta grova brott i Brottsbalken har i dagsläget en... (More) - Våldtäktsbrottet har, inom svensk rätt, genomgått omfattande förändringar de senaste decennierna. Begreppet har breddats och kommit att innefatta allt fler sexuella handlingar. Utvecklingen har följts av omfattande diskussioner samt medialt omdebatterade domar. Den så kallade samtyckesregleringen, där rekvisiten våld och hot avskaffas till förmån för ett bristande samtycke, har haft en central position i diskussionen. En samtyckesreglering skulle främst ta sikte på situationer där en sexuell handling utförts mot någons vilja, men utan att våld eller hot kunnat visas. En diskussion som dock i princip helt uteblivit, är den om en eventuell sänkning av skuldkravet.
Det flesta grova brott i Brottsbalken har i dagsläget en oaktsamhetsreglering som fångar upp de klandervärda handlingar som, på grund av bristande uppsåt, faller utanför uppsåtsbestämmelsen. Våldtäktsbrottet är dock fortfarande undantaget från en sådan bestämmelse. Bristande uppsåt, vid en handling som objektivt sett utgör våldtäkt, medför således inget straffansvar.
Norsk straffrätt har, sedan år 2000, haft en sådan oaktsamhetsreglering av våldtäktsbrottet. Kriminaliseringen har dock varit mycket omdiskuterad och är långt ifrån oproblematisk. Trots detta har kriminaliseringen behållits i den norska Straffeloven och även nyligen införts i 2005 års Straffelov, som dock ej ännu trätt i kraft. Argumentet som var avgörande för införandet av bestämmelsen, var att den norska regeringen ansåg att kriminaliseringen innebar en tydlig signal om vad som anses oacceptabelt i samhället. En oaktsam våldtäkt är en våldtäkt för mycket resonerades det. En oaktsamhetsreglering är kanske även i svensk rätt ett naturligt steg i en progressiv lagstiftning.
Inför ett eventuellt införande av bestämmelsen även i svensk rätt, bör effekterna av en kriminalisering noggrant utredas. En kriminalisering skulle möjligen kunna medföra oönskade effekter. Dessutom skulle skillnader mellan de norska och svenska rättsordningarna kunna påverka bestämmelsens tillämplighet.
En komparativ analys av den svenska och den norska rätten genomförs därför. De båda ländernas våldtäktsbestämmelser jämförs och eventuella skillnader dem emellan lyfts fram. Även rättsordningarnas uppsåtskonstruktioner analyseras och jämförs. I detta avseende är uppsåtets nedre gräns mot oaktsamheten av störst vikt för studien. Några större skillnader framkommer dock inte mellan rättsordningarna. Våldtäktsbestämmelserna överstämmer i stort. Avgörande tycks vara de små skillnader som faktiskt framkommit mellan uppsåtskonstruktionerna och dess nedre gränser. Men inte heller här kan avgörande skillnader identifieras.
Inom den norska rätten har en oaktsamhetsreglering utgjort gällande rätt sedan år 2000. Inför införande av bestämmelsen diskuterades en rad för- och nackdelar med en kriminalisering. Effekterna av kriminaliseringen var svårförutsedda. Efter tio år finns det dock möjlighet att utvärdera dessa aspekter och konstatera vilka som realiserats eller inte. Både för- och nackdelar har realiserats i mer eller mindre stor utsträckning. Dock tycks det som att fördelarna överväger de nackdelar som trots allt kan konstateras. (Less) - Abstract
- Under Swedish Penal Law the rape offense has undergone extensive changes in the recent decades. The concept of rape has been broadened and extended to cover more sexual acts then before. The trend has been followed by extensive discussions and media controversial judgments. The so-called consent regulation, where the elements of violence and threats would be replaced in favor of the victim’s lack of consent, has played a central role in the discussion. A consent regulation would primarily be focused on situations where a sexual act has been carried out against someone's will, but without proof of the presence of violence or threat. A discussion, which however has more or less been overlooked, is that of a lowering of the guilt level.
... (More) - Under Swedish Penal Law the rape offense has undergone extensive changes in the recent decades. The concept of rape has been broadened and extended to cover more sexual acts then before. The trend has been followed by extensive discussions and media controversial judgments. The so-called consent regulation, where the elements of violence and threats would be replaced in favor of the victim’s lack of consent, has played a central role in the discussion. A consent regulation would primarily be focused on situations where a sexual act has been carried out against someone's will, but without proof of the presence of violence or threat. A discussion, which however has more or less been overlooked, is that of a lowering of the guilt level.
Most of the serious criminal offences in the Swedish Criminal Code have today a negligent form that captures actions that, because of the lack of intent, falls outside the intent form. Rape is still the exemption from this. The lack of intent, for an act that objectively constitutes rape, thus leads to no criminal liability.
Norwegian criminal law has, since 2000, had such a negligent form of the rape offense. The criminalization has been very controversial and far from unproblematic. Despite this, the criminalization has retained in the Norwegian Penal Code and also recently introduced in the 2005 Penal Code, which although not yet is in force. The arguments that were crucial, to the introduction of negligent rape, were that the Norwegian government took the view that the criminalization made a clear signal regarding what’s unacceptable in their society. They rezoned that a negligent rape is a rape too much. A negligent form of rape is perhaps also a natural step for Swedish legislation.
The possible legislation of negligent rape in Swedish law requires a full investigated before it’s implemented. A criminalization could possibly cause unwanted effects. Moreover, differences between the Norwegian and Swedish legal systems could affect its validity.
A comparative analysis of the Swedish and Norwegian law is therefore necessary. The two countries' constructions of what constitutes rape are compared, and differences between them are highlighted. The both countries construction of guilt is analyzed and compared. In this regard, the intents lower limit is of great importance for the study. No major differences were however detected. The construction of the criminal law showed great similarities. The decisive factor seems to be the small differences that actually emerged between the design of the intent, and it’s lower limits. But even here any significant differences couldn’t be identified.
Under Norwegian law, a negligent form of rape has been criminalized since 2000. Prior to the introduction of the rule a discussed regarding the advantages and disadvantages of criminalization took place. The effects of the criminalization were difficult to forecast. After ten years it is however possible to evaluate these aspects and to identify those which where realized and which where not. Both the pros and cons seem to have realized to some degree. However, it appears that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1730719
- author
- Karlsson, Glenn LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Negligent rape - a comparative study of Swedish and Norwegian law
- course
- JURM01 20102
- year
- 2010
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- grov oaktsam våldtäkt, negligent rape, criminal law, straffrätt, komparativ rätt, oaktsam våldtäkt, comparative law, svensk rätt, norsk rätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 1730719
- date added to LUP
- 2010-12-14 14:52:39
- date last changed
- 2010-12-14 14:52:39
@misc{1730719,
abstract = {{Under Swedish Penal Law the rape offense has undergone extensive changes in the recent decades. The concept of rape has been broadened and extended to cover more sexual acts then before. The trend has been followed by extensive discussions and media controversial judgments. The so-called consent regulation, where the elements of violence and threats would be replaced in favor of the victim’s lack of consent, has played a central role in the discussion. A consent regulation would primarily be focused on situations where a sexual act has been carried out against someone's will, but without proof of the presence of violence or threat. A discussion, which however has more or less been overlooked, is that of a lowering of the guilt level.
Most of the serious criminal offences in the Swedish Criminal Code have today a negligent form that captures actions that, because of the lack of intent, falls outside the intent form. Rape is still the exemption from this. The lack of intent, for an act that objectively constitutes rape, thus leads to no criminal liability.
Norwegian criminal law has, since 2000, had such a negligent form of the rape offense. The criminalization has been very controversial and far from unproblematic. Despite this, the criminalization has retained in the Norwegian Penal Code and also recently introduced in the 2005 Penal Code, which although not yet is in force. The arguments that were crucial, to the introduction of negligent rape, were that the Norwegian government took the view that the criminalization made a clear signal regarding what’s unacceptable in their society. They rezoned that a negligent rape is a rape too much. A negligent form of rape is perhaps also a natural step for Swedish legislation.
The possible legislation of negligent rape in Swedish law requires a full investigated before it’s implemented. A criminalization could possibly cause unwanted effects. Moreover, differences between the Norwegian and Swedish legal systems could affect its validity.
A comparative analysis of the Swedish and Norwegian law is therefore necessary. The two countries' constructions of what constitutes rape are compared, and differences between them are highlighted. The both countries construction of guilt is analyzed and compared. In this regard, the intents lower limit is of great importance for the study. No major differences were however detected. The construction of the criminal law showed great similarities. The decisive factor seems to be the small differences that actually emerged between the design of the intent, and it’s lower limits. But even here any significant differences couldn’t be identified.
Under Norwegian law, a negligent form of rape has been criminalized since 2000. Prior to the introduction of the rule a discussed regarding the advantages and disadvantages of criminalization took place. The effects of the criminalization were difficult to forecast. After ten years it is however possible to evaluate these aspects and to identify those which where realized and which where not. Both the pros and cons seem to have realized to some degree. However, it appears that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.}},
author = {{Karlsson, Glenn}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Oaktsam våldtäkt - en komparativ studie av svensk och norsk rätt}},
year = {{2010}},
}