Förarbeten som rättskälla - En normativ studie av den dömande maktens lagtolkningsmetod
(2012) JURM02 20122Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Under den svenska lagstiftningsprocessen skapas material som brukar benämnas lagförarbeten. Några av de viktigare är kommittébetänkanden, propositioner och utskottsbetänkanden. Sedan lång tid tillbaka använder sig domstolarna av sådana förarbeten när det anses att lagtexten inte ger tillräcklig ledning. I vissa fall har förarbetena en helt avgörande betydelse för domstolarnas avgöranden. Förarbetsanvändningen har en historisk förklaring i att det, med start under 1800-talet eller möjligen ännu tidigare, har skett en växelverkan mellan den svenska lagskrivningstekniken och domstolarnas lagtolkningsmetod. Lagarna har efter hand blivit mer kortfattade och förarbetena mer utförliga.
Den klassiska maktdelningsläran innebär att statens makt... (More) - Under den svenska lagstiftningsprocessen skapas material som brukar benämnas lagförarbeten. Några av de viktigare är kommittébetänkanden, propositioner och utskottsbetänkanden. Sedan lång tid tillbaka använder sig domstolarna av sådana förarbeten när det anses att lagtexten inte ger tillräcklig ledning. I vissa fall har förarbetena en helt avgörande betydelse för domstolarnas avgöranden. Förarbetsanvändningen har en historisk förklaring i att det, med start under 1800-talet eller möjligen ännu tidigare, har skett en växelverkan mellan den svenska lagskrivningstekniken och domstolarnas lagtolkningsmetod. Lagarna har efter hand blivit mer kortfattade och förarbetena mer utförliga.
Den klassiska maktdelningsläran innebär att statens makt ska uppdelas, till exempel mellan lagstiftande, verkställande och dömande makt, och att de olika maktgrenarna ska vara åtskilda från varandra. Det har hävdats att det finns ett behov av ökad maktdelning i Sverige. Att domstolarna i så hög utsträckning använder sig av förarbeten kan ses som ett symtom på att den svenska domstolsmakten är relativt svag jämfört med de andra maktgrenarna.
Olika lagtolkningsmetoder ägnar olika mycket uppmärksamhet åt förarbeten. Subjektiva metoder försöker utröna lagstiftarens vilja såsom den uttrycks i förarbetena, medan objektiva metoder ägnar större uppmärksamhet åt lagens systematiska och språkliga utformning. Vid teleologisk tolkning kan förarbetena, jämte andra tolkningsdata, spela en viss roll för att belysa lagens ändamål.
Sedan åtminstone 1950-talet har det inom rättsvetenskapen förts en debatt kring förarabetenas ställning som rättskälla. De flesta av argumenten som har framförts kan placeras i någon av de tre kategorierna ”demokrati”, ”rättssäkerhet” eller ”maktdelning”. Vissa debattörer är mycket kritiska till förarbetsanvändning vid lagtolkning, andra är mycket positiva, och ytterligare andra menar att förarbetena får användas så länge det sker inom vissa givna ramar.
Efter att ha granskat de argument som framförts i debatten och vägt dessa, dels mot varandra, dels mot andra demokrati-, rättsäkerhets- och maktdelningssynpunkter, drar författaren slutsatsen att svenska domare bör ta mindre hänsyn till förarbeten än de gör idag. (Less) - Abstract
- Preparatory works such as, e.g. investigative reports, propositions, and committee reports, are created during the Swedish legislative process. The courts have, by tradition dating back many years, used these preparatory works as a source of law when interpretating acts of legislation. In some cases, preparatory works are the determinants for the courts’ rulings. The use of preparatory works has a historical explanation. During the 19th centrury, or possibly even earlier, the Swedish laws started to become more succinct, while the preparatory documents grew more comprehensive.
Separation of powers means that the state’s political power should be distributed between different branches, e.g. between a legislative, an executive and a... (More) - Preparatory works such as, e.g. investigative reports, propositions, and committee reports, are created during the Swedish legislative process. The courts have, by tradition dating back many years, used these preparatory works as a source of law when interpretating acts of legislation. In some cases, preparatory works are the determinants for the courts’ rulings. The use of preparatory works has a historical explanation. During the 19th centrury, or possibly even earlier, the Swedish laws started to become more succinct, while the preparatory documents grew more comprehensive.
Separation of powers means that the state’s political power should be distributed between different branches, e.g. between a legislative, an executive and a judicial branch, and that the branches should be distinct from each other. It has been contended that there is a need for a greater separation of powers in Sweden. The courts’ use of preparatory works can be viewed as a symptom of a comparatively weak judicial branch.
Different methods of judicial interpretation pay different attention to preparatory works. Subjective methods attempt to determine the legislator’s intentions as they are expressed in the preparatory works, while objective methods focus more on the systematic and the linguistic aspects of laws and mostly disregard what is written in the preparatory works. Proponents of teleological methods may use preparatory works as one of several sources, in order to determine the purposes of laws.
Since the 1950s, there has been an ongoing debate within jurisprudence on the preparatory works’ position as a source of law. Most of the arguments can be placed in one of the following categories: “democracy”, “due process” or “separation of powers”. Some debators are very critical to the usage of preparatory works as a mean of interpreting law, others are very positive and still others are of the opinion that preparatory works may be used but only within certain limits.
After examining the arguments adduced in the debate and comparing them to each other as well as to other aspects of democracy, due process and separation of powers, the author concludes that Swedish judges should be much more restrictive than presently, in their use of preparatory works as a source of law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/3233140
- author
- Larsson, Albin LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Preparatory works as a source of law - A normative study of judicial interpretation
- course
- JURM02 20122
- year
- 2012
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- allmän rättslära, statsrätt, förarbeten, lagförarbeten, lagtolkning, maktdelning, rättskälla, rättskällor, rättskällelära
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 3233140
- date added to LUP
- 2013-01-14 09:37:22
- date last changed
- 2013-01-23 13:48:22
@misc{3233140,
abstract = {{Preparatory works such as, e.g. investigative reports, propositions, and committee reports, are created during the Swedish legislative process. The courts have, by tradition dating back many years, used these preparatory works as a source of law when interpretating acts of legislation. In some cases, preparatory works are the determinants for the courts’ rulings. The use of preparatory works has a historical explanation. During the 19th centrury, or possibly even earlier, the Swedish laws started to become more succinct, while the preparatory documents grew more comprehensive.
Separation of powers means that the state’s political power should be distributed between different branches, e.g. between a legislative, an executive and a judicial branch, and that the branches should be distinct from each other. It has been contended that there is a need for a greater separation of powers in Sweden. The courts’ use of preparatory works can be viewed as a symptom of a comparatively weak judicial branch.
Different methods of judicial interpretation pay different attention to preparatory works. Subjective methods attempt to determine the legislator’s intentions as they are expressed in the preparatory works, while objective methods focus more on the systematic and the linguistic aspects of laws and mostly disregard what is written in the preparatory works. Proponents of teleological methods may use preparatory works as one of several sources, in order to determine the purposes of laws.
Since the 1950s, there has been an ongoing debate within jurisprudence on the preparatory works’ position as a source of law. Most of the arguments can be placed in one of the following categories: “democracy”, “due process” or “separation of powers”. Some debators are very critical to the usage of preparatory works as a mean of interpreting law, others are very positive and still others are of the opinion that preparatory works may be used but only within certain limits.
After examining the arguments adduced in the debate and comparing them to each other as well as to other aspects of democracy, due process and separation of powers, the author concludes that Swedish judges should be much more restrictive than presently, in their use of preparatory works as a source of law.}},
author = {{Larsson, Albin}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Förarbeten som rättskälla - En normativ studie av den dömande maktens lagtolkningsmetod}},
year = {{2012}},
}