Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Ökad hänvisning till ljud- och bildupptagning i hovrätten - Vilka är nackdelarna?

Al Saedi, Dina LU (2013) JURM02 20131
Department of Law
Abstract
Summary
Since November 1st 2008, the method of presenting oral testimonies in the Swedish Court of Appeal has changed. Since the reform “More modern court proceedings” the trials in Court of Appeal have become modernized. The modernization meant, inter alia, that audiovisual recording that have been conducted at the Swedish District Courts are, as a rule, played at the Court of Appeal. The recordings from the District Court are played, if necessary for the investigation, instead of a rehearing.

Now there are suggestions that the part of the trial in Court of Appeal in which the oral testimonies are presented should be abolished. Instead, the bench will view the audiovisual recordings outside the trial. The defence lawyer and the... (More)
Summary
Since November 1st 2008, the method of presenting oral testimonies in the Swedish Court of Appeal has changed. Since the reform “More modern court proceedings” the trials in Court of Appeal have become modernized. The modernization meant, inter alia, that audiovisual recording that have been conducted at the Swedish District Courts are, as a rule, played at the Court of Appeal. The recordings from the District Court are played, if necessary for the investigation, instead of a rehearing.

Now there are suggestions that the part of the trial in Court of Appeal in which the oral testimonies are presented should be abolished. Instead, the bench will view the audiovisual recordings outside the trial. The defence lawyer and the defendant shall be given the opportunity to come to the facilities of the Court of Appeal and view the audiovisual recordings. Otherwise, the defence lawyer will be given the opportunity to view the audiovisual recording at his or her office with a possible restriction not to copy and share the material. The public will also be given the opportunity to view the audiovisual recordings in the facilities of the Court of Appeal.

From a historical point of view the proceedings in the Court of Appeal have been oral since circa 17th century but the system soon changed into a both oral and written procedure. The records from the District Courts became the documents in case and therefore the oral procedure decreased in the Court of Appeal.

Since the introduction of the code of procedure of 1948, the proceedings in the Court of Appeal became oral again. In essence, the proceedings in Court of Appeal became a reiteration of the proceeding in District Courts. In 2008, the EMR-reform became effective. The basis of the reform is to be found in prop. 2004/05:131. The aim of the reform was to create modernized court proceedings. Furthermore, during 2011 an inquiry was drawn up as a follow-up to the inquiry behind prop. 2004:05:131. The follow-up is called “More modern court proceedings – an follow-up” (EMR-II). The aim of EMR-II was to investigate how the reform operates in practice. The conclusion was that the reform operated well in practice. During the spring of 2013, a new inquiry called Straffprocessbetänkandet was presented. Straffprocessbetänkandet includes propositions that go further than EMR-II when it comes to referring to audiovisual recordings of oral evidence. Therefore, there is a proposition to insert a provision that enact that there should always be an examination whether, with consideration to the scope of the case or other circumstances, it is suitably that audiovisual recordings in a particular case should be presented by referring to the them.

The function of the Swedish Court of Appeal is to retry the decision of the District Court. In Sweden there is a court hierarchy where the emphasis on the administration of justice is in the first instance. One of the main aims of the EMR-reform was to consolidate the Court of Appeal and its role as a supervisor in relation to the District Court. One of many examples is that the Court of Appeal has now the same hearing of evidence as the District Court since rehearing is now uncommon. The presentation of evidence in the Court of Appeal, after the EMR-reform, is by playing the audiovisual record of oral hearing (from District Courts). An additional rehearing from the party or the bench may occur. The aim of the additional rehearing is to clarify circumstances, both old and new, or in case of new evidence being brought to the case. Evaluation has shown that additional rehearing is not common in the Court of Appeal. When additional rehearing occurs, it is often as a request from the defendant.

The benefits from increased referring to oral testimony that has been presented are, among others, a more concentrated and efficient trials. Among disadvantages, it is shown that the defendant can have a negative experience since not all the parties take part of the oral evidence together. Another disadvantage is that the referring to oral evidence may restrict the openness of judicial proceedings.

The principle of public access to proceedings in court is protected by the constitution and implies that the public should have the right to attend the main hearing in courts. The principle has been established in Swedish legal system for a long time. The EKMR, which nowadays is a part of Swedish legal system, also states that the principle of public access to proceedings in court should be applied in order to not breach the convention. One of the reasons behind the principle is to preserve the trust in the administration of justice.

Efficiency, flexibility and suitability are from the perspective of the legislator, important factors which influence the formation of how legal proceedings in some cases, should look like. The mentioned factors should, however, not overrun the fundamental principles within the procedural code. It is therefore of great importance that before an amendment of law, accurately investigate the aim of a certain principle and to identify the risks with compromising the principle. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Sammanfattning
Sedan den första november 2008 har metoden för framställning av muntlig bevisning i hovrätt ändrats. Med anledning av reformen ”En modernare rättegång” moderniserades rättegången i hovrätten. Moderniseringen innebar bland annat att ljud- och bildupptagning som gjorts i tingsrätten, i regel spelas upp som muntlig bevisning i hovrätten. Nu finns förslag på att den delen av hovrättsförhandlingen som avser muntlig bevisning ska slopas och att rätten ska ta del av den utom huvudförhandlingen. Försvararen och den tilltalade ska ha möjlighet att komma till hovrättens lokaler och ta del av ljud- och bildupptagningen, alternativt ska försvararen kunna ta del av ljud- och bildupptagningen på sitt kontor med ett eventuellt villkor att... (More)
Sammanfattning
Sedan den första november 2008 har metoden för framställning av muntlig bevisning i hovrätt ändrats. Med anledning av reformen ”En modernare rättegång” moderniserades rättegången i hovrätten. Moderniseringen innebar bland annat att ljud- och bildupptagning som gjorts i tingsrätten, i regel spelas upp som muntlig bevisning i hovrätten. Nu finns förslag på att den delen av hovrättsförhandlingen som avser muntlig bevisning ska slopas och att rätten ska ta del av den utom huvudförhandlingen. Försvararen och den tilltalade ska ha möjlighet att komma till hovrättens lokaler och ta del av ljud- och bildupptagningen, alternativt ska försvararen kunna ta del av ljud- och bildupptagningen på sitt kontor med ett eventuellt villkor att inte kopiera vidare materialet. Även allmänheten ska kunna ta del av ljud- och bildupptagningarna när hänvisning sker. Detta genom att allmänheten ska få möjlighet att komma och ta del av upptagningarna i hovrättens lokaler.

Historiskt sett har hovrättsförfarandet varit muntligt sedan ca 1600-talet för att därefter ganska snabbt övergå till ett muntligt-protokollariskt system där tingsrättens protokoll utgjorde processmaterialet och därmed minskade muntligheten succesivt. Med anledning av införandet av 1948 års rättegångsbalk blev hovrättsförfarandet muntligt igen. I princip såg hovrättsförfarandet ut som en upprepning av tingsrättsförfarandet.

År 2008 trädde EMR-reformen i kraft. Underlaget till reformen återfinns i prop. 2004/05:131. Reformens syfte var att skapa en modernare rättegångsprocess. Vidare under 2011 tillkom en utredning som skulle vara en uppföljning till utredningen som lade grunden för prop. 2004/05:131. Uppföljningen heter ”En modernare rättegång II – en uppföljning” (nedan kallat EMR-II). Syftet med den sistnämnda utredningen var att utreda hur EMR-reformen fungerat i praktiken. Slutsatsen var att EMR-reformen slog väl ut. Något som EMR-II även lyfter fram är det bör ske ökad hänvisning till muntlig bevisning i hovrätten. Under våren 2013 publicerades en ny utredning, Straffprocessbetänkandet. Straffprocessbetänkandet lägger fram förslag som går längre än EMR-II avseende ökad hänvisning till muntlig bevisning i hovrätten. Det finns alltså förslag om att en bestämmelse ska införas som stadgar att det alltid ska ske en prövning om det med hänsyn till målets omfattning eller övriga omständigheter, är lämpligt att ljud- och bildupptagningar i målet läggs fram genom hänvisning.

Hovrättens funktion är att överpröva tingsrättens avgöranden. I Sverige finns en instansordning där tyngdpunkten i rättsskipningen ska ligga i första instans. Ett av syftena med EMR-reformen var att förstärka hovrättens roll som kontrollinstans. Detta bland annat genom att hovrätten numera har samma bevisunderlag som tingsrätten då omförhör blivit sällsynt. Bevisningen i hovrätten efter EMR-reformen går ut på att ljud- och bildupptagningarna från tingsrätten spelas upp under huvudförhandlingen. Ett så kallat tilläggsförhör från parters eller rättens håll får förekomma. Syftet med tilläggsförhör är att reda ut omständigheter (nya som gamla) eller om det tillkommit ny bevisning i målet. Utvärderingen har visat att tilläggsförhör fortfarande inte är särskilt vanlig i hovrätterna. När tilläggsförhör förekommer är det oftast som önskemål från försvarets sida.

Av de fördelar som presenterats vad gäller ökad hänvisning till muntlig bevisning är bland annat att huvudförhandlingar blir mer koncentrerade och effektiva. Bland nackdelarna pekas det på att det för den tilltalades del kan upplevas som negativt att inte alla aktörer tar del av ljud- och bildupptagningarna tillsammans. En annan nackdel kan vara att ökad hänvisning till muntlig bevisning kommer innebära en inskränkning i förhandlingsoffentligheten.

Principen om förhandlingsoffentlighet är skyddad av grundlagen och innebär bland annat att allmänheten har rätt att närvara vid huvudförhandlingar. Principen är sedan länge förankrad i svensk rätt. Även EKMR som numera är en del av svensk rätt, stadgar att principen om förhandlingsoffentlighet ska gälla för att det inte ska ske en konventionskränkning. Skälen bakom principen om förhandlingsoffentlighet är bland annat att upprätthålla ett förtroende för rättsskipningen.

Effektivitet, flexibilitet och ändamålsenlighet är ur lagstiftarens synvinkel viktiga faktorer som påverkar utformningen av hur rättsprocessen i vissa fall ska se ut. De nyssnämnda faktorerna bör dock inte köra över grundläggande principer inom processrätten. Det är därför av vikt att innan en lagändring sker, noga utreda syftet med en viss princip och fastställa riskerna med att rucka på den. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Al Saedi, Dina LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Increased referring to audiovisual recordings in the Court of Appeal - What are the disadvantages?
course
JURM02 20131
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Straffprocessrätt, Processrätt, Straffrätt, Civil and criminal procedure, Muntlig bevisning, Oral testimony, Tilläggsförhör
language
Swedish
id
3801409
date added to LUP
2013-06-14 12:49:34
date last changed
2013-06-14 12:49:34
@misc{3801409,
  abstract     = {Summary
Since November 1st 2008, the method of presenting oral testimonies in the Swedish Court of Appeal has changed. Since the reform “More modern court proceedings” the trials in Court of Appeal have become modernized. The modernization meant, inter alia, that audiovisual recording that have been conducted at the Swedish District Courts are, as a rule, played at the Court of Appeal. The recordings from the District Court are played, if necessary for the investigation, instead of a rehearing. 

Now there are suggestions that the part of the trial in Court of Appeal in which the oral testimonies are presented should be abolished. Instead, the bench will view the audiovisual recordings outside the trial. The defence lawyer and the defendant shall be given the opportunity to come to the facilities of the Court of Appeal and view the audiovisual recordings. Otherwise, the defence lawyer will be given the opportunity to view the audiovisual recording at his or her office with a possible restriction not to copy and share the material. The public will also be given the opportunity to view the audiovisual recordings in the facilities of the Court of Appeal. 

From a historical point of view the proceedings in the Court of Appeal have been oral since circa 17th century but the system soon changed into a both oral and written procedure. The records from the District Courts became the documents in case and therefore the oral procedure decreased in the Court of Appeal. 

Since the introduction of the code of procedure of 1948, the proceedings in the Court of Appeal became oral again. In essence, the proceedings in Court of Appeal became a reiteration of the proceeding in District Courts. In 2008, the EMR-reform became effective. The basis of the reform is to be found in prop. 2004/05:131. The aim of the reform was to create modernized court proceedings. Furthermore, during 2011 an inquiry was drawn up as a follow-up to the inquiry behind prop. 2004:05:131. The follow-up is called “More modern court proceedings – an follow-up” (EMR-II). The aim of EMR-II was to investigate how the reform operates in practice. The conclusion was that the reform operated well in practice. During the spring of 2013, a new inquiry called Straffprocessbetänkandet was presented. Straffprocessbetänkandet includes propositions that go further than EMR-II when it comes to referring to audiovisual recordings of oral evidence. Therefore, there is a proposition to insert a provision that enact that there should always be an examination whether, with consideration to the scope of the case or other circumstances, it is suitably that audiovisual recordings in a particular case should be presented by referring to the them. 

The function of the Swedish Court of Appeal is to retry the decision of the District Court. In Sweden there is a court hierarchy where the emphasis on the administration of justice is in the first instance. One of the main aims of the EMR-reform was to consolidate the Court of Appeal and its role as a supervisor in relation to the District Court. One of many examples is that the Court of Appeal has now the same hearing of evidence as the District Court since rehearing is now uncommon. The presentation of evidence in the Court of Appeal, after the EMR-reform, is by playing the audiovisual record of oral hearing (from District Courts). An additional rehearing from the party or the bench may occur. The aim of the additional rehearing is to clarify circumstances, both old and new, or in case of new evidence being brought to the case. Evaluation has shown that additional rehearing is not common in the Court of Appeal. When additional rehearing occurs, it is often as a request from the defendant. 

The benefits from increased referring to oral testimony that has been presented are, among others, a more concentrated and efficient trials. Among disadvantages, it is shown that the defendant can have a negative experience since not all the parties take part of the oral evidence together. Another disadvantage is that the referring to oral evidence may restrict the openness of judicial proceedings.

The principle of public access to proceedings in court is protected by the constitution and implies that the public should have the right to attend the main hearing in courts. The principle has been established in Swedish legal system for a long time. The EKMR, which nowadays is a part of Swedish legal system, also states that the principle of public access to proceedings in court should be applied in order to not breach the convention. One of the reasons behind the principle is to preserve the trust in the administration of justice.

Efficiency, flexibility and suitability are from the perspective of the legislator, important factors which influence the formation of how legal proceedings in some cases, should look like. The mentioned factors should, however, not overrun the fundamental principles within the procedural code. It is therefore of great importance that before an amendment of law, accurately investigate the aim of a certain principle and to identify the risks with compromising the principle.},
  author       = {Al Saedi, Dina},
  keyword      = {Straffprocessrätt,Processrätt,Straffrätt,Civil and criminal procedure,Muntlig bevisning,Oral testimony,Tilläggsförhör},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Ökad hänvisning till ljud- och bildupptagning i hovrätten - Vilka är nackdelarna?},
  year         = {2013},
}