Advanced

När idrottsmän blir gärningsmän

Ivarsson Thored, Maria LU (2016) JURM02 20161
Department of Law
Abstract
During participation in sport games the athletes are constantly exposed to violence that would be considered as assault or abuse if it happend on any other location. These acts of violence are often required to fulfill the purpose of the sport, and are sometimes even allowed according to the rules of the game, and can not cause culpability. But how much violence is enough to legally punish the athlete for acts committed on the field? The purpose of this essay is to increase the knowledge of the criminal regulation of violence committed during participation in sports and thus answer the question under which circumstances an athlete can be legally responsible for acts of violence on the field. The method used in this essay is the grounds of... (More)
During participation in sport games the athletes are constantly exposed to violence that would be considered as assault or abuse if it happend on any other location. These acts of violence are often required to fulfill the purpose of the sport, and are sometimes even allowed according to the rules of the game, and can not cause culpability. But how much violence is enough to legally punish the athlete for acts committed on the field? The purpose of this essay is to increase the knowledge of the criminal regulation of violence committed during participation in sports and thus answer the question under which circumstances an athlete can be legally responsible for acts of violence on the field. The method used in this essay is the grounds of legal dogma. However the method has not been used strictly but instead it has been extended to also include case law from lower court. The material used in the essay are mainly legal doctrine and case law from lower court but laws with comments, legislative history and precedents have also been used in the amount it has been available in this area. The general starting points of the essay has been the principle of equality before the law and the requirements of rule of law and predictability.

What constitutes a crime is regulated in the 1 chapter 1§ in the swedish Penal Code. According to the regulation a crime is an act, written in law, to which a penalty is prescribed. Besides from this formal requirement some necessary condition must be fulfilled. Asp, Ulväng and Jareborg divide these necessary condition into the necessary conditions for undued deed and the necessary conditions for personal responsibility. This essay only contains the first necessary conditions, undued deed. The necessary conditions for undued deed can also be divided into two conditions: the crime accordance and the absence of justifying circumstances. The justifying circumstances of relevance for this essay is consent, which is regulated in 24 chapter 7 § the swedish Penal Code, and social adequacy.

In the legal assessment of violence committed during participation in sport the court take into account the rules and the purpose of the specific sport. The doctrine as well as the legislative history and case law from lower court all agree under which circumstances violence during sports should be legally punished and which acts that not should be. Acts of violence which is against the rules in the sport but in accordance with the purpose of the sport, or act of violence within the rules, do not cause culpability. And on the contrary acts of violence which is against both the rules and the purpose of the sport do cause culpability. However the different kinds of legal sources do not agree which justifying circumstances that should be applied to violence during participation in sports. The doctrine advocate consent, social adequacy or a balance of interests while the case law from lower court almost exclusively practise consent.

Acts of violence committed after the referee has called off the game do cause culpability due to the fact that the act does not fulfill the purpose of the game. When the game is started the crucial circumstance is whether or not the act is committed associated with the struggle for the ball/puck. Acts which is not associated with the struggle for the ball/puck do cause culpability while acts which is associated with the struggle do not. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Vid idrottsutövning utsätts idrottsmännen ständigt för knuffar och tacklingar som hade varit att bedöma som misshandel eller ofredande om de inträffat på någon annan plats. Då dessa handlingar i mångt och mycket krävs för att uppfylla syftet med idrotten, och dessutom i viss mån även är tillåtna enligt spelreglerna, kan inte samtliga av dessa handlingar föranleda straffrättsligt ansvar. Men hur långt sträcker sig egentligen ansvarsfriheten vid våld som begåtts under idrottsutövande? Syftet med uppsatsen är att öka förståelsen för den straffrättsliga regleringen av idrottsvåld och således besvara frågan under vilka omständigheter som en idrottsman kan bli straffrättsligt ansvarig för gärningar begångna på spelplanen. Den metod som har... (More)
Vid idrottsutövning utsätts idrottsmännen ständigt för knuffar och tacklingar som hade varit att bedöma som misshandel eller ofredande om de inträffat på någon annan plats. Då dessa handlingar i mångt och mycket krävs för att uppfylla syftet med idrotten, och dessutom i viss mån även är tillåtna enligt spelreglerna, kan inte samtliga av dessa handlingar föranleda straffrättsligt ansvar. Men hur långt sträcker sig egentligen ansvarsfriheten vid våld som begåtts under idrottsutövande? Syftet med uppsatsen är att öka förståelsen för den straffrättsliga regleringen av idrottsvåld och således besvara frågan under vilka omständigheter som en idrottsman kan bli straffrättsligt ansvarig för gärningar begångna på spelplanen. Den metod som har använts för uppsatsen är den rättsdogmatiska metoden. Metoden har dock inte enbart använts i strikt mening utan även utvidgats till att omfatta underrättspraxis. Det material som använts i uppsatsen är främst straffrättslig doktrin och underrättspraxis men även lagar med lagkommentarer, förarbeten och prejudicerande praxis har använts i den mån som dessa källor har funnits på området. De allmänna utgångspunkterna för uppsatsen har utgjorts av dels principen om likhet inför lagen och dels av kraven på rättssäkerhet och förutsebarhet.

Vad som utgör ett brott regleras i 1 kap. 1 § brottsbalken. Bestämmelsen anger att brott är en gärning som är beskriven i lag till vilken ett straff är föreskrivet. Förutom att detta formella krav måste vara uppfyllt krävs även att ytterligare rekvisit är uppfyllda för att brott ska anses föreligga. Asp, Ulväng och Jareborg delar in dessa rekvisit i rekvisiten för otillåten gärning och rekvisiten för personligt ansvar. I uppsatsen redogörs enbart för rekvisiten för otillåten gärning. Rekvisiten för otillåten gärning kan sedermera delas upp i brottsbeskrivningsenlighet och frånvaro av rättfärdigande omständigheter. De rättfärdigande omständigheterna som är av relevans för uppsatsens ämne är samtycke, vilket regleras i 24 kap. 7 § brottsbalken, och den oskrivna ansvarsfrihetsgrunden social adekvans.

Vid bedömningen av våld som begåtts under idrottsutövning tas hänsyn till den enskilda idrottens regler och idé. Såväl den straffrättsliga doktrinen som förarbeten och underrättspraxis synes vara överens om under vilka omständigheter som idrottsrelaterat våld ska ansvarsbefrias. Vid våldshandlingar som är regelstridiga men som faller inom ramarna för idrottens idé, eller som rent av är regelenliga, blir straffrättsligt ansvar inte aktuellt. Våldsgärningar som däremot strider mot såväl den enskilda idrottens regler som dess idé kan motsatsvis föranleda straffrättsligt ansvar. I de olika rättskällorna råder det dock delade meningar vilken ansvarsfrihetsgrund som ska tillämpas vid idrottsrelaterat våld. De straffrättsliga författarna talar om användningen av samtycke, social adekvans eller en intresseavvägning medan praxis nästintill uteslutande tillämpar samtyckesbestämmelsen.

Gärningar som begås under idrottsutövande sedan spelet blåsts av synes föranleda straffrättsligt ansvar då gärningarna inte kan anses falla inom ramarna för spelets idé. När spelet istället är igång är det avgörande huruvida gärningen begåtts utan samband med spel om bollen/pucken eller inte. Vad gäller handlingar som begåtts utan samband med spel synes utgångspunkten vara att sådana handlingar inte kan anses överensstämma med idrottens idé och straffrättsligt ansvar blir således aktuellt. Motsatsvis synes straffrättsligt ansvar som utgångspunkt inte bli aktuellt vid handlingar som begås i samband med spel. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Ivarsson Thored, Maria LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
When athletes become offenders
course
JURM02 20161
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Straffrätt
language
Swedish
id
8874377
date added to LUP
2016-06-14 10:50:24
date last changed
2016-06-14 10:50:24
@misc{8874377,
  abstract     = {During participation in sport games the athletes are constantly exposed to violence that would be considered as assault or abuse if it happend on any other location. These acts of violence are often required to fulfill the purpose of the sport, and are sometimes even allowed according to the rules of the game, and can not cause culpability. But how much violence is enough to legally punish the athlete for acts committed on the field? The purpose of this essay is to increase the knowledge of the criminal regulation of violence committed during participation in sports and thus answer the question under which circumstances an athlete can be legally responsible for acts of violence on the field. The method used in this essay is the grounds of legal dogma. However the method has not been used strictly but instead it has been extended to also include case law from lower court. The material used in the essay are mainly legal doctrine and case law from lower court but laws with comments, legislative history and precedents have also been used in the amount it has been available in this area. The general starting points of the essay has been the principle of equality before the law and the requirements of rule of law and predictability.

What constitutes a crime is regulated in the 1 chapter 1§ in the swedish Penal Code. According to the regulation a crime is an act, written in law, to which a penalty is prescribed. Besides from this formal requirement some necessary condition must be fulfilled. Asp, Ulväng and Jareborg divide these necessary condition into the necessary conditions for undued deed and the necessary conditions for personal responsibility. This essay only contains the first necessary conditions, undued deed. The necessary conditions for undued deed can also be divided into two conditions: the crime accordance and the absence of justifying circumstances. The justifying circumstances of relevance for this essay is consent, which is regulated in 24 chapter 7 § the swedish Penal Code, and social adequacy. 

In the legal assessment of violence committed during participation in sport the court take into account the rules and the purpose of the specific sport. The doctrine as well as the legislative history and case law from lower court all agree under which circumstances violence during sports should be legally punished and which acts that not should be. Acts of violence which is against the rules in the sport but in accordance with the purpose of the sport, or act of violence within the rules, do not cause culpability. And on the contrary acts of violence which is against both the rules and the purpose of the sport do cause culpability. However the different kinds of legal sources do not agree which justifying circumstances that should be applied to violence during participation in sports. The doctrine advocate consent, social adequacy or a balance of interests while the case law from lower court almost exclusively practise consent. 

Acts of violence committed after the referee has called off the game do cause culpability due to the fact that the act does not fulfill the purpose of the game. When the game is started the crucial circumstance is whether or not the act is committed associated with the struggle for the ball/puck. Acts which is not associated with the struggle for the ball/puck do cause culpability while acts which is associated with the struggle do not.},
  author       = {Ivarsson Thored, Maria},
  keyword      = {Straffrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {När idrottsmän blir gärningsmän},
  year         = {2016},
}