Advanced

Får ej provocera enskild till att begå en typ av gärning som denne inte annars hade begått - Hur avgörs det?

Shaw, Kim LU (2015) LAGF03 20151
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
En av polisens metoder för att bedriva spaning är genom provokatörer. Provokatörer kan genomföra provokativa åtgärder. Om ett brott begås efter att en provokativ åtgärd vidtagits får den tilltalade inte dömas om dennes rätt, enligt europakonventionen, blivit oåterkalleligen undergrävd. Enskilds rätt är att anse som oåterkalleligen undergrävd om denne provocerats till att begå en typ av gärning som denne inte annars hade begått. Detta krav leder till att domstolen, i en rättegång, måste ta ställning till om de tror att den tilltalade hade gjort sig skyldig till ett hypotetiskt brott i framtiden.
Uppsatsen syftar till att utreda vilka omständigheter som, med stöd i rättspraxis, kan anses vara avgörande för svensk domstol vid denna... (More)
En av polisens metoder för att bedriva spaning är genom provokatörer. Provokatörer kan genomföra provokativa åtgärder. Om ett brott begås efter att en provokativ åtgärd vidtagits får den tilltalade inte dömas om dennes rätt, enligt europakonventionen, blivit oåterkalleligen undergrävd. Enskilds rätt är att anse som oåterkalleligen undergrävd om denne provocerats till att begå en typ av gärning som denne inte annars hade begått. Detta krav leder till att domstolen, i en rättegång, måste ta ställning till om de tror att den tilltalade hade gjort sig skyldig till ett hypotetiskt brott i framtiden.
Uppsatsen syftar till att utreda vilka omständigheter som, med stöd i rättspraxis, kan anses vara avgörande för svensk domstol vid denna prognosbedömning.
För att besvara frågeställningen redogörs för provokatörer och provokativa åtgärder. Provokatörer kan bestå av både myndighetsanställda och privatpersoner. Användandet av provokativa åtgärder som polisär spaningsmetod styrs av ett antal formella och materiella krav.
Två på området betydelsefulla avgörande från Europa- domstolen studeras. Detta för att dessa är till stöd när Högsta domstolens avgörande tolkas. Av Europadomstolens avgörande går det att sluta sig till att Europadomstolen anser tre omständigheter vara av betydelse; tidigare brottslighet, vem som initierade den första kontakten samt övriga omständigheter hänförliga till det framprovocerade brottet.
Min slutsats är att Högsta domstolen anser; tidigare brottslighet, vem som initierade den första kontakten samt övriga omständigheter hänförliga till det framprovocerade brottet vara omständigheter av betydelse vid prognosbedömningen. Slutsatsen underbyggs av rättspraxis från svenskdomstol.
Tidigare brottslighet analyseras med hjälp av kriminalstatistik, vilket pekar på på att det finns vetenskapliga belägg som visar på att en tidigare dömd person är benägen att begå ytterligare brott. (Less)
Abstract
The Swedish police have a wide selection of methods available in conducting investigations. One of them is to use agent provocateur. An agent provocateur is a person who incest people to commit crimes. If a crime is committed after the use of an agent provocateur and the prosecutor choose to prosecute. The court is powerless to pass sentence if the defendants right to a fair trail, according to article 6 ECHR, has been violated. The right to a fair trail is violated if the defendant, after the use of agent provocateur, committed a type of crime that the defendant otherwise would not have commit. This means, that the court before pass sentence, needs to answer the question if they think that the defendant would have commit the same type of... (More)
The Swedish police have a wide selection of methods available in conducting investigations. One of them is to use agent provocateur. An agent provocateur is a person who incest people to commit crimes. If a crime is committed after the use of an agent provocateur and the prosecutor choose to prosecute. The court is powerless to pass sentence if the defendants right to a fair trail, according to article 6 ECHR, has been violated. The right to a fair trail is violated if the defendant, after the use of agent provocateur, committed a type of crime that the defendant otherwise would not have commit. This means, that the court before pass sentence, needs to answer the question if they think that the defendant would have commit the same type of crime in the future.
The purpose of this bachelor’s thesis is to examine which material facts can, by virtue of case law, be considered essential for the adjudication.
To answer the question, I describe the use of agent provocateurs. My conclusion is that both government employees and private individuals can be considered as agent provocateur and that the use of agent provocateurs in Sweden is governed by both substantive and procedural rules.
Two significant decisions from the European Court of Justice studied. Of those decision, can be inferred that three material facts can be considered essential for the adjudication; previous criminal record, who initiated the first contact and other circumstances appertain to the provoked crime.
By virtue of Swedish case law, which process the question if the court thinks that the defendant will commit a crime in the future. It is, according to me, to conclude that the Swedish court considered previous criminal record, who initiated the first contact and other circumstances appertain to the provoked crime as facts to be considered as essential for the adjudication.
Previous criminal record analysed using criminal statistic, which indicate that there is scientific evidence showing that a person already convicted, are disposed to commit further crimes. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Shaw, Kim LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20151
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
criminal procedure, criminal law, provokativa åtgärder
language
Swedish
id
5425262
date added to LUP
2015-07-06 10:13:38
date last changed
2015-07-06 10:13:38
@misc{5425262,
  abstract     = {The Swedish police have a wide selection of methods available in conducting investigations. One of them is to use agent provocateur. An agent provocateur is a person who incest people to commit crimes. If a crime is committed after the use of an agent provocateur and the prosecutor choose to prosecute. The court is powerless to pass sentence if the defendants right to a fair trail, according to article 6 ECHR, has been violated. The right to a fair trail is violated if the defendant, after the use of agent provocateur, committed a type of crime that the defendant otherwise would not have commit. This means, that the court before pass sentence, needs to answer the question if they think that the defendant would have commit the same type of crime in the future.
The purpose of this bachelor’s thesis is to examine which material facts can, by virtue of case law, be considered essential for the adjudication.
To answer the question, I describe the use of agent provocateurs. My conclusion is that both government employees and private individuals can be considered as agent provocateur and that the use of agent provocateurs in Sweden is governed by both substantive and procedural rules.
Two significant decisions from the European Court of Justice studied. Of those decision, can be inferred that three material facts can be considered essential for the adjudication; previous criminal record, who initiated the first contact and other circumstances appertain to the provoked crime.
By virtue of Swedish case law, which process the question if the court thinks that the defendant will commit a crime in the future. It is, according to me, to conclude that the Swedish court considered previous criminal record, who initiated the first contact and other circumstances appertain to the provoked crime as facts to be considered as essential for the adjudication.
Previous criminal record analysed using criminal statistic, which indicate that there is scientific evidence showing that a person already convicted, are disposed to commit further crimes.},
  author       = {Shaw, Kim},
  keyword      = {criminal procedure,criminal law,provokativa åtgärder},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Får ej provocera enskild till att begå en typ av gärning som denne inte annars hade begått - Hur avgörs det?},
  year         = {2015},
}