Bedömning på (o)vetenskaplig grund? - Om bevisvärdering av muntliga utsagor i asylmål grundade på sexuell läggning
(2018) JURM02 20181Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Kritik har riktats mot bedömningarna av svenska asylärenden grundade på sexuell läggning. Kritiken mot bedömningarna i dessa mål riktar sig främst mot att bevisvärderingen verkar grundas på subjektiva eller fördomsfulla antaganden, och avsaknaden av legitima bedömningsgrunder för att avgöra trovärdighet och tillförlitlighet i de muntliga utsagorna. Syftet med denna uppsats är därför att utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv analysera domstolarnas bevisvärdering av muntliga utsagor i asylmål där sexuell läggning åberopats som skyddsgrund. Uppsatsen anlägger, genom användande av den rättsanalytiska metoden, ett tvärvetenskapligt synsätt för att analysera rättstillämpningen och bevisvärderingen i dessa asylmål med bakgrund i... (More)
- Kritik har riktats mot bedömningarna av svenska asylärenden grundade på sexuell läggning. Kritiken mot bedömningarna i dessa mål riktar sig främst mot att bevisvärderingen verkar grundas på subjektiva eller fördomsfulla antaganden, och avsaknaden av legitima bedömningsgrunder för att avgöra trovärdighet och tillförlitlighet i de muntliga utsagorna. Syftet med denna uppsats är därför att utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv analysera domstolarnas bevisvärdering av muntliga utsagor i asylmål där sexuell läggning åberopats som skyddsgrund. Uppsatsen anlägger, genom användande av den rättsanalytiska metoden, ett tvärvetenskapligt synsätt för att analysera rättstillämpningen och bevisvärderingen i dessa asylmål med bakgrund i beteendevetenskaplig forskning.
Bedömningen av huruvida den sökande i asylmål gjort sin sexuella läggning sannolik görs i svensk rätt genom en tillförlitlighets- och trovärdighetsbedömning, vilken baseras på vissa återkommande bedömningskriterier som fastslagits genom svensk och internationell rätt. Dessa kriterier involverar en bedömning av utsagans klarhet och detaljrikedom, motstridigheter i uppgifterna, utsagans oföränderlighet genom processen, samt en bedömning av den sökandes allmänna trovärdighet. Användningen av respektive bedömningskriterium vid bevisvärderingen kan sägas ha varierande empiriskt stöd i psykologisk forskning på området. I vissa fall ges i forskningen klart stöd till användningen av en bedömningsgrund, och i andra fall avfärdas den helt eller delvis. Beslutsfattarnas användning av dessa bedömningskriterier kan därmed, baserat på psykologisk forskning, sägas vara både befogade och problematiska, beroende på vilket bedömningskriterium som åsyftas.
Bedömningen av huruvida den sökande uppfyllt beviskravet genom att göra sin sexuella läggning sannolik, och därmed bör tillerkännas bevislättnad, sker oundvikligen med utgångspunkt i den enskilde beslutsfattarens subjektiva uppfattningar och slutsatser. Beslutsfattarens allmänna erfarenhetssatser och deras innehåll har alltså stor betydelse för bevisvärderingen i dessa asylmål, och det är av vikt för materiellt riktiga avgöranden att dessa erfarenhetssatser inte grundas i fördomsfulla uppfattningar om homosexualitet eller homosexuella. Psykologisk forskning har här eventuellt potential att förbättra rättssäkerheten i dessa bedömningar genom att en ökad kunskap om beteendevetenskapliga mekanismer hos beslutsfattarna skulle kunna bidra till en högre andel materiellt riktiga domar. Hur detta tvärvetenskapliga element skulle kunna introduceras i rättstillämpningen kräver dock vidare utredning. (Less) - Abstract
- The assessments of Swedish asylum cases based on sexual orientation has been criticized. The criticism of the assessments in these cases primarily regards the fact that the evaluation of evidence appears to be based on subjective or prejudicial assumptions, and also the lack of legitimate grounds for determining credibility and reliability in the oral statements. The purpose of this paper is therefore to analyze the evaluation of evidence of the oral statements in asylum cases where sexual orientation is invoked as a basis for protection, and whether this assessment is in compliance with the rule of law. Through the use of the legal analysis method, the essay establishes an interdisciplinary approach to analyzing the evaluation of evidence... (More)
- The assessments of Swedish asylum cases based on sexual orientation has been criticized. The criticism of the assessments in these cases primarily regards the fact that the evaluation of evidence appears to be based on subjective or prejudicial assumptions, and also the lack of legitimate grounds for determining credibility and reliability in the oral statements. The purpose of this paper is therefore to analyze the evaluation of evidence of the oral statements in asylum cases where sexual orientation is invoked as a basis for protection, and whether this assessment is in compliance with the rule of law. Through the use of the legal analysis method, the essay establishes an interdisciplinary approach to analyzing the evaluation of evidence in these asylum cases through the use of behavioral science.
The assessment of whether the applicant has made his sexual orientation credible is in the Swedish legal system established by the use of a reliability and credibility assessment. This assessment is based on certain recurring assessment criteria recognized by Swedish precedents and international law. These criteria involve an assessment of the statement’s clarity and detail, whether there are contradictions in the facts, the statement’s consistency throughout the legal process, and an assessment of the applicant’s general credibility. The use of the assessment criteria in the evaluation of evidence can be said to have varied empirical support in relevant psychological research. Psychological research clearly supports the use of some of the assessment criteria, but the use of some criteria is completely or partially dismissed by behavioral science. The decision-makers’ use of these assessment criteria can thus be said to be both legitimate and problematic, depending on which assessment criterion is at hand.
Whether the applicant fulfilled the evidentiary requirement is assessed through an evaluation of the credibility in the statements regarding his sexual orientation. The assessment of the fulfillment of the evidentiary requirement, and whether the applicant therefore should be given the benefit of the doubt, is inevitably based on the subjective perceptions and assumptions of the individual decision maker. The matter of the decision-maker’s general experience and common knowledge is therefore of great importance for the evaluation of evidence in these asylum cases. It is therefore important for the achievement of substantively correct decisions that the decision-maker’s assumptions and perceptions are not based on a prejudicial image of homosexuality or homosexuals. Thus, psychological research has the potential to improve the legal certainty of the assessments in these asylum cases, as an increased knowledge of behavioral science in decision-makers could contribute to a higher percentage of substantively correct judgments. However, how this interdisciplinary element could be introduced into the application of law requires further investigation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8941837
- author
- Gustafsson, Elin LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Assessment on non-scientific basis? - Evaluation of evidence concerning oral statements in asylum cases based on sexual orientation
- course
- JURM02 20181
- year
- 2018
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- förvaltningsrätt, bevisrätt, flyktingrätt, asylrätt, bevisvärdering
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8941837
- date added to LUP
- 2018-06-08 10:40:21
- date last changed
- 2018-06-08 10:40:21
@misc{8941837,
abstract = {{The assessments of Swedish asylum cases based on sexual orientation has been criticized. The criticism of the assessments in these cases primarily regards the fact that the evaluation of evidence appears to be based on subjective or prejudicial assumptions, and also the lack of legitimate grounds for determining credibility and reliability in the oral statements. The purpose of this paper is therefore to analyze the evaluation of evidence of the oral statements in asylum cases where sexual orientation is invoked as a basis for protection, and whether this assessment is in compliance with the rule of law. Through the use of the legal analysis method, the essay establishes an interdisciplinary approach to analyzing the evaluation of evidence in these asylum cases through the use of behavioral science.
The assessment of whether the applicant has made his sexual orientation credible is in the Swedish legal system established by the use of a reliability and credibility assessment. This assessment is based on certain recurring assessment criteria recognized by Swedish precedents and international law. These criteria involve an assessment of the statement’s clarity and detail, whether there are contradictions in the facts, the statement’s consistency throughout the legal process, and an assessment of the applicant’s general credibility. The use of the assessment criteria in the evaluation of evidence can be said to have varied empirical support in relevant psychological research. Psychological research clearly supports the use of some of the assessment criteria, but the use of some criteria is completely or partially dismissed by behavioral science. The decision-makers’ use of these assessment criteria can thus be said to be both legitimate and problematic, depending on which assessment criterion is at hand.
Whether the applicant fulfilled the evidentiary requirement is assessed through an evaluation of the credibility in the statements regarding his sexual orientation. The assessment of the fulfillment of the evidentiary requirement, and whether the applicant therefore should be given the benefit of the doubt, is inevitably based on the subjective perceptions and assumptions of the individual decision maker. The matter of the decision-maker’s general experience and common knowledge is therefore of great importance for the evaluation of evidence in these asylum cases. It is therefore important for the achievement of substantively correct decisions that the decision-maker’s assumptions and perceptions are not based on a prejudicial image of homosexuality or homosexuals. Thus, psychological research has the potential to improve the legal certainty of the assessments in these asylum cases, as an increased knowledge of behavioral science in decision-makers could contribute to a higher percentage of substantively correct judgments. However, how this interdisciplinary element could be introduced into the application of law requires further investigation.}},
author = {{Gustafsson, Elin}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Bedömning på (o)vetenskaplig grund? - Om bevisvärdering av muntliga utsagor i asylmål grundade på sexuell läggning}},
year = {{2018}},
}