Advanced

Brottslighet i skymundan - En undersökning av kvinnors våld mot män och domstolens bedömning därav i ett genusrättsvetenskapligt perspektiv

Svensson, Fredrika LU (2017) JURM02 20171
Department of Law
Abstract
Criminal law is gender neutral in its written construction, but there are exceptions. One of those exceptions is gross violation of women’s integrity. Its sibling provision is called gross violation of integrity, which is gender neutral. The difference between the two provisions is that the relation of the perpetrator and the victim in gross violation of women’s integrity is predetermined in terms of gender and has a requirement of previous or present cohabitation. The two provisions are otherwise the same in its requirements and in its range of punishment. The constitution states that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and thus the law should be gender neutral. It is however possible to make an exception if the exception is... (More)
Criminal law is gender neutral in its written construction, but there are exceptions. One of those exceptions is gross violation of women’s integrity. Its sibling provision is called gross violation of integrity, which is gender neutral. The difference between the two provisions is that the relation of the perpetrator and the victim in gross violation of women’s integrity is predetermined in terms of gender and has a requirement of previous or present cohabitation. The two provisions are otherwise the same in its requirements and in its range of punishment. The constitution states that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and thus the law should be gender neutral. It is however possible to make an exception if the exception is motivated as an equality measure, which gross violation of women’s integrity is. The intention of the provision gross violation of women’s integrity is to show women’s vulnerable situation in close relation violence caused by the male-dominated power structure in society and the misconception of women’s inferiority. However, during the last few years, research and statistics has showed that men are victims to close relation violence almost as much as women are. The difference lies in that the violence the women suffer is a graver violence. This dissertation argues in the analysis that if the male-dominated power structure dissolves then the gender dictated provision gross violation of women’s integrity should also dissolve. Since the reason for its necessity would have ceased to exist.
The dissertation’s case study contains 32 cases where half of them are cases of gross violation of integrity with a female perpetrator and her male partner as a victim and the other half consists of gross violation of women’s integrity. A comparison of some cases will show and indicate that female perpetrators are treated more leniently and receive a less serious sentence than male perpetrators. In the case Hit by plastic toy (Slag med plastleksak) for example the female perpetrator was sentenced to the minimum sentence for six cases of assault, two cases of damages and two cases of unlawful threat. In the case of Mallet finger (Droppfinger) the male perpetrator was sentenced to prison for ten months, more than the minimum sentence, for four cases of assault. It is, however, not possible to conclude that female perpetrators always receive a more beneficial treatment in the crime of gross violation of integrity. There are cases that indicates the direct opposite, for example the case Self-defence? (Nödvärn?). The court’s assessment and ruling in the cases are far from coherent in the case study but the lack of coherency is not derived from, at least not solely, the perpetrator’s gender. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Straffrättens lagtext är könsneutral, men inte utan undantag. Ett undantag är grov kvinnofridskränkning som tillsammans med grov fridskränkning stadgas i BrB 4 kap. 4a §. Skillnaden mellan fridskränkningsbrotten är att grov kvinnofridskränkning har ett förbestämt könskrav på gärningspersonen och brottsoffret samt ställer krav på deras relation. Gärningspersonen, en man, och brottsoffret, en kvinna, skall bo eller ha bott tillsammans under äktenskapsliknande förhållanden. I övrigt gäller samma straffskala, samma krav på upprepade gärningar och samma krav på gärningarnas natur. I RF 1 kap. 9 § stadgas principen om lika inför lagen, att personer, oberoende av exempelvis deras kön skall behandlas jämlikt. Lagtext skall såldes vara könsneutral.... (More)
Straffrättens lagtext är könsneutral, men inte utan undantag. Ett undantag är grov kvinnofridskränkning som tillsammans med grov fridskränkning stadgas i BrB 4 kap. 4a §. Skillnaden mellan fridskränkningsbrotten är att grov kvinnofridskränkning har ett förbestämt könskrav på gärningspersonen och brottsoffret samt ställer krav på deras relation. Gärningspersonen, en man, och brottsoffret, en kvinna, skall bo eller ha bott tillsammans under äktenskapsliknande förhållanden. I övrigt gäller samma straffskala, samma krav på upprepade gärningar och samma krav på gärningarnas natur. I RF 1 kap. 9 § stadgas principen om lika inför lagen, att personer, oberoende av exempelvis deras kön skall behandlas jämlikt. Lagtext skall såldes vara könsneutral. Ett undantag från likhet inför lagen kan godtas om undantaget istället syftar till att främja jämställdhet. Grov kvinnofridskränkning motiveras av just det. Avsikten med grov kvinnofridskränkning var och är att lyfta kvinnors utsatta situation som orsakats av den mansdominerade maktstrukturen i samhället där mäns våld mot kvinnor anses till stor del bero på föreställningen om kvinnans underställda situation. Under de senaste åren har forskning och statistik lyft fram resultat som tyder på att män är nästintill lika utsatta för våld i relationer, med skillnaden att kvinnor är utsatta för grövre våld. Uppsatsens analys argumenterar för att upphörandet av den mansdominerade maktstrukturen bör medföra upphörandet av grov kvinnofridskränkning.
Uppsatsens rättsfallsstudie består av 32 rättsfall, hälften är fall om grov fridskränkning där en kvinnlig gärningsperson har brukat våld mot sin manlige partner och den andra hälften består av fall om grov kvinnofridskränkning. Rättsfallen utgör underlag för en rättsfallsjämförelse huruvida en gärningsperson samt deras våld bedöms annorlunda av domstol med anledning av deras kön. Vid en jämförelse av vissa rättsfall kan det framstå som att en kvinnlig gärningsperson har erhållit lindrigare straff och en mer gynnsam behandling än en manlig gärningsperson. Exempelvis erhöll den kvinnliga gärningspersonen i Slag med plastleksak minimistraffet för sex fall av misshandel av normalgraden, två fall av skadegörelse samt två fall av olaga hot. I rättsfallet Droppfinger erhöll den manlige gärningspersonen tio månader i fängelse, mer än minimistraffet, för fyra fall av misshandel av normalgraden. Det är däremot inte möjligt att dra en slutsats om att kvinnliga gärningspersoner alltid gynnas inom grov fridskränkning. Det finns rättsfall i studien som visar på raka motsatsen, exempelvis rättsfallet Nödvärn?. Domstolens bedömningar av rättsfallen är långt ifrån enhetliga eller konsekventa men bristen på enhetlighet beror utifrån rättsfallen inte, åtminstone inte enbart, på kön. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Svensson, Fredrika LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The hidden violence - A study of women's violence against men and the court's assessment thereof in a legal gender perspective
course
JURM02 20171
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
straffrätt, fridskränkningsbrott, grov kvinnofridskränkning, grov fridskränkning, kvinnors våld mot män, rättsfall, genusrättsvetenskap, jämlikhet, jämställdhet, criminal law, women's violence against men
language
Swedish
id
8907665
date added to LUP
2017-06-08 12:00:07
date last changed
2017-06-08 12:00:07
@misc{8907665,
  abstract     = {Criminal law is gender neutral in its written construction, but there are exceptions. One of those exceptions is gross violation of women’s integrity. Its sibling provision is called gross violation of integrity, which is gender neutral. The difference between the two provisions is that the relation of the perpetrator and the victim in gross violation of women’s integrity is predetermined in terms of gender and has a requirement of previous or present cohabitation. The two provisions are otherwise the same in its requirements and in its range of punishment. The constitution states that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and thus the law should be gender neutral. It is however possible to make an exception if the exception is motivated as an equality measure, which gross violation of women’s integrity is. The intention of the provision gross violation of women’s integrity is to show women’s vulnerable situation in close relation violence caused by the male-dominated power structure in society and the misconception of women’s inferiority. However, during the last few years, research and statistics has showed that men are victims to close relation violence almost as much as women are. The difference lies in that the violence the women suffer is a graver violence. This dissertation argues in the analysis that if the male-dominated power structure dissolves then the gender dictated provision gross violation of women’s integrity should also dissolve. Since the reason for its necessity would have ceased to exist.
The dissertation’s case study contains 32 cases where half of them are cases of gross violation of integrity with a female perpetrator and her male partner as a victim and the other half consists of gross violation of women’s integrity. A comparison of some cases will show and indicate that female perpetrators are treated more leniently and receive a less serious sentence than male perpetrators. In the case Hit by plastic toy (Slag med plastleksak) for example the female perpetrator was sentenced to the minimum sentence for six cases of assault, two cases of damages and two cases of unlawful threat. In the case of Mallet finger (Droppfinger) the male perpetrator was sentenced to prison for ten months, more than the minimum sentence, for four cases of assault. It is, however, not possible to conclude that female perpetrators always receive a more beneficial treatment in the crime of gross violation of integrity. There are cases that indicates the direct opposite, for example the case Self-defence? (Nödvärn?). The court’s assessment and ruling in the cases are far from coherent in the case study but the lack of coherency is not derived from, at least not solely, the perpetrator’s gender.},
  author       = {Svensson, Fredrika},
  keyword      = {straffrätt,fridskränkningsbrott,grov kvinnofridskränkning,grov fridskränkning,kvinnors våld mot män,rättsfall,genusrättsvetenskap,jämlikhet,jämställdhet,criminal law,women's violence against men},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Brottslighet i skymundan - En undersökning av kvinnors våld mot män och domstolens bedömning därav i ett genusrättsvetenskapligt perspektiv},
  year         = {2017},
}