Advanced

Valet av sluten ungdomsvård - återspeglas lagstiftarens intentioner i den praktiska rättstillämpningen?

Nilsson, Paulina LU (2012) JURM02 20112
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
För drygt tio år sedan infördes sluten ungdomsvård som ersättning av fängelsestraffet för lagöverträdare mellan 15 och 17 år. Tidigare var fängelse enda påföljden som fanns att tillgå för unga som gjort sig skyldiga till mycket allvarlig brottslighet. Lagstiftaren fann situationen otillfredsställande, eftersom fängelsemiljön ansågs olämplig för unga personer. Istället skulle de unga nu beredas individanpassad vård och behandling på särskilda ungdomshem i Statens institutionsstyrelses regi. Trots den starkt individualpreventivt präglade verkställigheten får de ungas behov av vård inte tillmätas någon betydelse vid påföljdens utdömande. Istället är förutsättningarna för valet av sluten ungdomsvård identiska med fängelsestraffets; det krävs... (More)
För drygt tio år sedan infördes sluten ungdomsvård som ersättning av fängelsestraffet för lagöverträdare mellan 15 och 17 år. Tidigare var fängelse enda påföljden som fanns att tillgå för unga som gjort sig skyldiga till mycket allvarlig brottslighet. Lagstiftaren fann situationen otillfredsställande, eftersom fängelsemiljön ansågs olämplig för unga personer. Istället skulle de unga nu beredas individanpassad vård och behandling på särskilda ungdomshem i Statens institutionsstyrelses regi. Trots den starkt individualpreventivt präglade verkställigheten får de ungas behov av vård inte tillmätas någon betydelse vid påföljdens utdömande. Istället är förutsättningarna för valet av sluten ungdomsvård identiska med fängelsestraffets; det krävs synnerliga skäl med hänsyn till brottslighetens straffvärde och art samt till den unges tidigare brottslighet.

Undersökningar som genomfördes kort efter den slutna ungdomsvårdens införande visar att långt fler ungdomar kommit att berövas friheten än vad som var fallet före påföljdens införande den 1 januari 1999. Det ökade antalet frihetsberövanden kan endast till viss del förklaras med ökad brottslighet. Det ligger därför nära till hands att misstänka att den slutna ungdomsvårdens vårdande verkställighet utgör ett mer tilltalande alternativ, vilket därför kommit att ersätta även lindrigare påföljder. Mot bakgrund härav avser författaren med denna uppsats att undersöka i vilken utsträckning den praktiska rättstillämpningen avseende påföljdens utdömande harmonierar med den av lagstiftaren tilltänka. Är det möjligt att urskilja tendenser på att den starkt vård- och behandlingsinriktade verkställigheten även påverkar valet av sluten ungdomsvård? Underlaget för tillämpningsstudien består av tio hovrättsavgöranden från år 2011. Genom att granska vilka skäl domstolarna anger för påföljdens utdömande, samt med vilka argument de utesluter alternativa påföljder, undersöks ur ett rättviseperspektiv i vilken utsträckning individualpreventiva hänsyn tillåts inverka vid påföljdsbestämningen. Med stöd av tidigare arbeten på området undersöks vidare om, och i så fall hur, domstolarnas motivering av den slutna ungdomsvården förändrats över tid.

Studien visar att domstolarna stundtals tenderar att låta de ungas behov av vård och rehabilitering inverka vid utdömandet av sluten ungdomsvård. Vid något tillfälle kan individens behov av vård sägas utgöra själva grunden för påföljdsvalet, då individualpreventiva argument används för att motivera synnerliga skäl. Andra gånger kan sådana argument lokaliseras till bedömningen av om alternativa påföljder är tillräckligt ingripande och därmed indirekt påverka valet av sluten ungdomsvård. Rättstillämpningen har under den granskade femårsperioden visat sig vara tämligen likartad. En viss ökad konvergens med den av lagstiftaren tilltänkta rättstillämpningen kan dock urskiljas i fråga om hovrätternas uteslutande av alternativa påföljder. Samtidigt kan en något minskad konvergens avseende tingsrätternas motivering av synnerliga skäl urskiljas. Sammantaget är förändringarna små. (Less)
Abstract
Over ten years ago closed institutional youth care was introduced as a substitute of the prison sentence for offenders between the ages of 15 and 17. Previously, imprisonment was the only sanction for young people who have committed serious delinquency. The legislature found the situation unsatisfactory as the prison environment was considered harmful and inappropriate for young people. The responsibility for the new sanction therefore came to be shouldered by the National Board of Institutional Care instead of Prison and Probation Service. In special youth homes, young offenders are now given individualized care and treatment. Although the execution is strongly characterized by individual prevention, the young peoples’ need for care... (More)
Over ten years ago closed institutional youth care was introduced as a substitute of the prison sentence for offenders between the ages of 15 and 17. Previously, imprisonment was the only sanction for young people who have committed serious delinquency. The legislature found the situation unsatisfactory as the prison environment was considered harmful and inappropriate for young people. The responsibility for the new sanction therefore came to be shouldered by the National Board of Institutional Care instead of Prison and Probation Service. In special youth homes, young offenders are now given individualized care and treatment. Although the execution is strongly characterized by individual prevention, the young peoples’ need for care should not be considered in the choice of the sanction. The conditions for the choice of closed institutional youth care are instead identical to the imprisonments’. It therefore requires extraordinary reasons with regard to the penal value and nature of the crime and also the young person’s recidivism.

Surveys conducted shortly after the introduction of closed institutional youth care indicates that far more young people have been deprived of their liberty than was the case before the sanction was introduced January 1, 1999. Since the increased numbers of deprivation of liberty can only be partially explained by increased crime, it is close at hand to suspect that the new sanction is a more appealing alternative, which therefore has replaced not only imprisonment but also other less severe sanctions. In the light of these facts the author of this paper intends to examine to what extent the practical application of the law, regarding the imposition of the sanction, is consistent with what the legislature stated. Is it possible to discern tendencies of that the care and treatment-oriented execution also affects the choice of the sanction? The basis for the study consists of 10 judgments of courts of appeal from 2011. By examining the reasons courts use to motivate the sanction and with what arguments they exclude alternative sanctions, this paper examines from a rule of law perspective to what extent individual preventive considerations affect the penalty determination. On the basis of previous work in the subject field there will further be examined whether and if so, courts argumentation regarding the imposition of the closed institutional youth care has changed over time.

The study indicate that courts at times tend to let the young peoples’ needs for care and rehabilitation affect the imposition of the institutional youth care. In some cases, the individuals’ care needs constitutes the very basis of the choice of sanctions as the individual preventive arguments forms the extraordinary reasons. In other cases, such arguments are localized to the assessment whether alternative sanctions can be considered sufficiently severe and can therefore be said to indirectly influence the choice of closed institutional youth care. It is not possible to observe any significant change in the courts’ reasons for the imposition of the institutional youth care during the examined five-year period. The changes are minor. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Nilsson, Paulina LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The choice of closed institutional youth care - are the intentions of the legislator obeyed in the practical application of law?
course
JURM02 20112
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
synnerliga skäl, unga lagöverträdare, vårdbehov, straffrätt, sluten ungdomsvård
language
Swedish
id
2275479
date added to LUP
2012-02-16 13:54:15
date last changed
2012-02-16 13:54:15
@misc{2275479,
  abstract     = {Over ten years ago closed institutional youth care was introduced as a substitute of the prison sentence for offenders between the ages of 15 and 17. Previously, imprisonment was the only sanction for young people who have committed serious delinquency. The legislature found the situation unsatisfactory as the prison environment was considered harmful and inappropriate for young people. The responsibility for the new sanction therefore came to be shouldered by the National Board of Institutional Care instead of Prison and Probation Service. In special youth homes, young offenders are now given individualized care and treatment. Although the execution is strongly characterized by individual prevention, the young peoples’ need for care should not be considered in the choice of the sanction. The conditions for the choice of closed institutional youth care are instead identical to the imprisonments’. It therefore requires extraordinary reasons with regard to the penal value and nature of the crime and also the young person’s recidivism.    

Surveys conducted shortly after the introduction of closed institutional youth care indicates that far more young people have been deprived of their liberty than was the case before the sanction was introduced January 1, 1999. Since the increased numbers of deprivation of liberty can only be partially explained by increased crime, it is close at hand to suspect that the new sanction is a more appealing alternative, which therefore has replaced not only imprisonment but also other less severe sanctions. In the light of these facts the author of this paper intends to examine to what extent the practical application of the law, regarding the imposition of the sanction, is consistent with what the legislature stated. Is it possible to discern tendencies of that the care and treatment-oriented execution also affects the choice of the sanction? The basis for the study consists of 10 judgments of courts of appeal from 2011. By examining the reasons courts use to motivate the sanction and with what arguments they exclude alternative sanctions, this paper examines from a rule of law perspective to what extent individual preventive considerations affect the penalty determination. On the basis of previous work in the subject field there will further be examined whether and if so, courts argumentation regarding the imposition of the closed institutional youth care has changed over time. 

The study indicate that courts at times tend to let the young peoples’ needs for care and rehabilitation affect the imposition of the institutional youth care. In some cases, the individuals’ care needs constitutes the very basis of the choice of sanctions as the individual preventive arguments forms the extraordinary reasons. In other cases, such arguments are localized to the assessment whether alternative sanctions can be considered sufficiently severe and can therefore be said to indirectly influence the choice of closed institutional youth care. It is not possible to observe any significant change in the courts’ reasons for the imposition of the institutional youth care during the examined five-year period. The changes are minor.},
  author       = {Nilsson, Paulina},
  keyword      = {synnerliga skäl,unga lagöverträdare,vårdbehov,straffrätt,sluten ungdomsvård},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Valet av sluten ungdomsvård - återspeglas lagstiftarens intentioner i den praktiska rättstillämpningen?},
  year         = {2012},
}