Advanced

Ansvarsfrihet med hänvisning till social adekvans - problem eller möjlighet?

Olofsson, Emma LU (2012) JURM02 20121
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
I 24 kap. BrB återfinns olika ansvarsfrihetsbestämmelser som medför att en annars brottslig handling går fri från straffrättsligt ansvar. I vissa fall kan ansvarsfrihet även meddelas utan uttryckligt lagstöd. I doktrin och praxis har ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd inte sällan diskuterats vid olika samtyckeshandlingar, då samtycket, en lagreglerad ansvarsfrihetsbestämmelse i 24 kap. BrB, inte ensamt anses kunna medföra ansvarsfrihet. Begreppet social adekvans brukar ofta förekomma i diskussioner kring ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd. Dock är begreppets precisa tillämpningsområde inte helt klart. Hur detta begrepp används och tillämpas i svensk rätt står därför i fokus för denna framställning. Syftet med framställningen är att undersöka och... (More)
I 24 kap. BrB återfinns olika ansvarsfrihetsbestämmelser som medför att en annars brottslig handling går fri från straffrättsligt ansvar. I vissa fall kan ansvarsfrihet även meddelas utan uttryckligt lagstöd. I doktrin och praxis har ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd inte sällan diskuterats vid olika samtyckeshandlingar, då samtycket, en lagreglerad ansvarsfrihetsbestämmelse i 24 kap. BrB, inte ensamt anses kunna medföra ansvarsfrihet. Begreppet social adekvans brukar ofta förekomma i diskussioner kring ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd. Dock är begreppets precisa tillämpningsområde inte helt klart. Hur detta begrepp används och tillämpas i svensk rätt står därför i fokus för denna framställning. Syftet med framställningen är att undersöka och problematisera social adekvans som grund för ansvarsfrihet samt att undersöka hur begreppet kan användas för att dra gränsen mellan straffritt och straffbart handlande. Särskilt fokus ligger på att undersöka om social adekvans är en generellt tillämplig grund för ansvarsfrihet och kan användas för att dra gränsen mellan straffbart och straffritt vid alla typer av brott. Eftersom social adekvans ofta tillämpas och diskuteras vid olika samtyckeshandlingar, undersöks särskilt om social adekvans kan tillämpas vid alla typer av handlingar som samtidigt aktualiserar frågor om samtycke.

I problematiseringen av social adekvans används våldtäktsbestämmelsen som exempel. Sambandet mellan dessa två straffrättsliga områden är inte självklart, då de lagreglerade bestämmelserna i 24 kap. BrB generellt inte anses tillämpliga på sexualbrott. Samtidigt pågår en intensiv debatt om sexualbrottsregleringen bör baseras på bristande samtycke istället som idag på tvång. Framställningen utgår ifrån en tes om att resonemangen kring social adekvans och diskussionen kring en samtyckesbaserad våldtäktsreglering berör ett gemensamt straffrättsligt problem - att avgränsa det straffbara området. Mot bakgrund därav och med tanke på att social adekvans främst diskuterats vid samtyckeshandlingar, undersöks om resonemangen kring social adekvans kan tillämpas på handlingar som aktualiserar tillämpning av våldtäktsbestämmelsen. Utifrån det rättssociologiska normperspektivet och perspektivets distinktion mellan sociala och rättsliga normer jämförs sedan resonemangen kring social adekvans med diskussionerna kring en samtyckesbaserad våldtäktsreglering. Syftet är att undersöka om det finns olika aspekter av detta gemensamma problemkomplex och om därför inte samma lösning kan användas för att dra gränsen mellan straffritt och straffbart vid alla typer av brott. (Less)
Abstract
In the Swedish penal code (Brottsbalken) lawful defences to criminal acts are set out in chapter twenty-four. Even though an act is formally considered a crime, these defences exclude criminal responsibility. Several of the defences have been created in case law and some of them are still applied without formal support of the penal code. The purpose of this paper is to explore, examine and analyse these unwritten defences (ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd) in order to determine the more specific conditions for their application. Under which circumstances or conditions can a criminal act be justified or excused without formal support of the penal code?

Social adequacy (social adekvans) is a commonly used term in doctrine and court practice to... (More)
In the Swedish penal code (Brottsbalken) lawful defences to criminal acts are set out in chapter twenty-four. Even though an act is formally considered a crime, these defences exclude criminal responsibility. Several of the defences have been created in case law and some of them are still applied without formal support of the penal code. The purpose of this paper is to explore, examine and analyse these unwritten defences (ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd) in order to determine the more specific conditions for their application. Under which circumstances or conditions can a criminal act be justified or excused without formal support of the penal code?

Social adequacy (social adekvans) is a commonly used term in doctrine and court practice to describe those acts that can justified or excused without formal support of the penal code. The term is especially used when consent, a defence regulated in chapter twenty-four of the penal code, is not enough to excuse or justify the act. How and when the term social adequacy more specifically can be used is, however, not entirely clear. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to investigate how this term is used and discussed in preparatory legalisation work, doctrine and court practice. The aim is also to problematize social adequacy as a defence and to problematize how the term is used in drawing the line between criminal and non-criminal acts. The essay specially focuses on analyizing the generality of the term. Can social adequacy be used as a defence for all types of criminal acts or is it limited to only certain criminal acts? In particular, since the term is often used when consent is not enough, can the term justify or excuse all criminal acts that somehow involve consent?

In order to problematize the generality of social adequacy the provisions on rape is used as an example. There is no clear connection between the rape provisions and the provisions on defences. There is, however, an on-going debate in Sweden whether or not lack of consent should be used instead of force as a decisive criterion in the provisions on rape. The essay is based on a theory that both the on-going debate around the decisive criterion in the rape provision and the discussion around social adequacy exemplify a common problem in criminal law; how to draw the line between lawful and unlawful acts. As I see it, both social adequacy and the on-going debate around the rape provision have to do with a discrepancy between social norms (sociala normer), norms in the society and legal norms (rättsliga normer), norms to be found in different statutes. So if there is a common problem, the question is whether or not the same solution can be used to draw the line between lawful and unlawful acts for all types of crime? (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Olofsson, Emma LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Social adequacy as a defence
course
JURM02 20121
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
straffrätt, ansvarsfrihet, social adekvans
language
Swedish
id
2688629
date added to LUP
2012-10-15 10:14:07
date last changed
2012-10-15 10:14:07
@misc{2688629,
  abstract     = {In the Swedish penal code (Brottsbalken) lawful defences to criminal acts are set out in chapter twenty-four. Even though an act is formally considered a crime, these defences exclude criminal responsibility. Several of the defences have been created in case law and some of them are still applied without formal support of the penal code. The purpose of this paper is to explore, examine and analyse these unwritten defences (ansvarsfrihet utan lagstöd) in order to determine the more specific conditions for their application. Under which circumstances or conditions can a criminal act be justified or excused without formal support of the penal code?

Social adequacy (social adekvans) is a commonly used term in doctrine and court practice to describe those acts that can justified or excused without formal support of the penal code. The term is especially used when consent, a defence regulated in chapter twenty-four of the penal code, is not enough to excuse or justify the act. How and when the term social adequacy more specifically can be used is, however, not entirely clear. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to investigate how this term is used and discussed in preparatory legalisation work, doctrine and court practice. The aim is also to problematize social adequacy as a defence and to problematize how the term is used in drawing the line between criminal and non-criminal acts. The essay specially focuses on analyizing the generality of the term. Can social adequacy be used as a defence for all types of criminal acts or is it limited to only certain criminal acts? In particular, since the term is often used when consent is not enough, can the term justify or excuse all criminal acts that somehow involve consent? 

In order to problematize the generality of social adequacy the provisions on rape is used as an example. There is no clear connection between the rape provisions and the provisions on defences. There is, however, an on-going debate in Sweden whether or not lack of consent should be used instead of force as a decisive criterion in the provisions on rape. The essay is based on a theory that both the on-going debate around the decisive criterion in the rape provision and the discussion around social adequacy exemplify a common problem in criminal law; how to draw the line between lawful and unlawful acts. As I see it, both social adequacy and the on-going debate around the rape provision have to do with a discrepancy between social norms (sociala normer), norms in the society and legal norms (rättsliga normer), norms to be found in different statutes. So if there is a common problem, the question is whether or not the same solution can be used to draw the line between lawful and unlawful acts for all types of crime?},
  author       = {Olofsson, Emma},
  keyword      = {straffrätt,ansvarsfrihet,social adekvans},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Ansvarsfrihet med hänvisning till social adekvans - problem eller möjlighet?},
  year         = {2012},
}