Advanced

Ansvar vid allvarlig psykisk störning

Persson, Veronika LU (2017) LAGF03 20171
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Psykiskt störda lagöverträdare har länge särbehandlats i svensk rätt. Fram till brottsbalkens ikraftträdande år 1965 har psykiskt störda som saknat förståndets bruk befunnit sig i en sorts undantagssituation i förhållande till andra lagöverträdare, då de inte ådömts straffrättsligt ansvar på grund av otillräknelighet. Med brottsbalkens införande försvann tillräknelighetskravet för straffrättsligt ansvar, vilket gjort den svenska regleringen unik i förhållande till jämförbara länder som tillämpar en tillräknelighetsmodell. Enligt gällande rätt sker särregleringen för allvarligt psykiskt störda lagöverträdare vid påföljdsbestämningen, då de kan dömas till rättspsykiatrisk vård.

För utdömande av påföljd krävs det att det subjektiva... (More)
Psykiskt störda lagöverträdare har länge särbehandlats i svensk rätt. Fram till brottsbalkens ikraftträdande år 1965 har psykiskt störda som saknat förståndets bruk befunnit sig i en sorts undantagssituation i förhållande till andra lagöverträdare, då de inte ådömts straffrättsligt ansvar på grund av otillräknelighet. Med brottsbalkens införande försvann tillräknelighetskravet för straffrättsligt ansvar, vilket gjort den svenska regleringen unik i förhållande till jämförbara länder som tillämpar en tillräknelighetsmodell. Enligt gällande rätt sker särregleringen för allvarligt psykiskt störda lagöverträdare vid påföljdsbestämningen, då de kan dömas till rättspsykiatrisk vård.

För utdömande av påföljd krävs det att det subjektiva ansvarsrekvisitet (skuld) är uppfyllt, genom uppsåt eller oaktsamhet. Uppsåtsbedömningen ser likadan ut för alla lagöverträdare, oavsett psykisk störning. Uppsatsen fokuserar på att belysa problemet med att tillämpa samma uppsåtsbedömning på psykiskt störda lagöverträdare som andra lagöverträdare, och därmed ålägga allvarligt psykiskt störda lagöverträdare straffrättsligt ansvar. Uppsåtet bedöms bland annat genom att titta på gärningspersonens medvenhet, vilken vid allvarliga psykoser kan vara i princip frånvarande.

Det har diskuterats om ett tillräknelighetsrekvisit bör återinföras i svensk rätt, och i uppsatsen presenteras det senaste förslaget från Psykiatrilagsutredningen om tillräknelighet som rekvisit för personligt ansvar. Genom att betraktas som otillräknelig påförs gärningspersonen inte ett oförtjänt straffrättsligt ansvar. Dock presenterar betänkandet rättsföljder knutna till allvarligt psykiskt störda lagöverträdare som kan framstå som diskriminerande och orättfärdiga. (Less)
Abstract
Offenders with mental diseases have been treated separately from other offenders for a long time in Swedish Law. Mentally disordered offenders were not considered responsible for their actions, due to lack of culpability. When the Swedish Penal Code was introduced in 1965 the eligibility requirements for sanity was removed, making the Swedish Law quite unique compared to most states. For offenders with mental diseases the special treatment occurs by the sentencing of a crime. The court can sentence a person who committed crime during a mental disease to forensic psychiatric care. Only during special circumstances should a mental diseased offender be sentenced to prison.

Necessary conditions such as guilt must be present when a person is... (More)
Offenders with mental diseases have been treated separately from other offenders for a long time in Swedish Law. Mentally disordered offenders were not considered responsible for their actions, due to lack of culpability. When the Swedish Penal Code was introduced in 1965 the eligibility requirements for sanity was removed, making the Swedish Law quite unique compared to most states. For offenders with mental diseases the special treatment occurs by the sentencing of a crime. The court can sentence a person who committed crime during a mental disease to forensic psychiatric care. Only during special circumstances should a mental diseased offender be sentenced to prison.

Necessary conditions such as guilt must be present when a person is responsible for a crime. The person must have had intent or carelessness to the action. This applies for offenders with or without mental diseases. The essay focuses on the problem of applying the rules of intent on offenders with mental diseases, who may be considered responsible for actions committed during a difficult psychosis state. When intent is investigated, the court considers whether the offender was aware of his or her action. In cases with mentally disordered offenders their awareness must be hard to determine.

Whether accountability should be reinstated in Swedish Law or not has been discussed for a long time. In the essay the most recent proposal about reinstating accountability is presented. According to the proposal, a mentally disordered person would not be considered as responsible for a criminal action, due to lack of culpability. However, the proposal presents other legal consequences to the offenders which appears to be discriminating people with mental diseases. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Persson, Veronika LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20171
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Straffrätt, allvarlig psykisk störning, tillräknelighet
language
Swedish
id
8908237
date added to LUP
2017-06-29 15:57:37
date last changed
2017-06-29 15:57:37
@misc{8908237,
  abstract     = {Offenders with mental diseases have been treated separately from other offenders for a long time in Swedish Law. Mentally disordered offenders were not considered responsible for their actions, due to lack of culpability. When the Swedish Penal Code was introduced in 1965 the eligibility requirements for sanity was removed, making the Swedish Law quite unique compared to most states. For offenders with mental diseases the special treatment occurs by the sentencing of a crime. The court can sentence a person who committed crime during a mental disease to forensic psychiatric care. Only during special circumstances should a mental diseased offender be sentenced to prison.

Necessary conditions such as guilt must be present when a person is responsible for a crime. The person must have had intent or carelessness to the action. This applies for offenders with or without mental diseases. The essay focuses on the problem of applying the rules of intent on offenders with mental diseases, who may be considered responsible for actions committed during a difficult psychosis state. When intent is investigated, the court considers whether the offender was aware of his or her action. In cases with mentally disordered offenders their awareness must be hard to determine.

Whether accountability should be reinstated in Swedish Law or not has been discussed for a long time. In the essay the most recent proposal about reinstating accountability is presented. According to the proposal, a mentally disordered person would not be considered as responsible for a criminal action, due to lack of culpability. However, the proposal presents other legal consequences to the offenders which appears to be discriminating people with mental diseases.},
  author       = {Persson, Veronika},
  keyword      = {Straffrätt,allvarlig psykisk störning,tillräknelighet},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Ansvar vid allvarlig psykisk störning},
  year         = {2017},
}