Bevisbörda i brottmål i förhållande till den nya samtyckeslagstiftningen
(2018) LAGF03 20182Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- I samband med den nya samtyckeslagstiftningen uppstod diskussioner kring åklagarens bevisbörda. Syftet med uppsatsen är att klargöra om bevisbördan påverkats av den nya lagstiftningen. Straffbestämmelsen om våldtäkt i sin nya lydelse innebär att gränsen mellan en straffri och straffbar gärning går vid om deltagandet i den sexuella handlingen är frivilligt. Ett frivilligt deltagande ska ha kommit till uttryck genom ord eller handling eller på annat sätt. Skillnaden kan sägas vara den att det inte längre krävs att gärningsmannen använt sig av våld eller hot för att handlingen ska anses vara straffbar som våldtäkt. Det är dock fortfarande åklagaren som har bevisbördan för att den sexuella handlingen har genomförts utan ett frivilligt... (More)
- I samband med den nya samtyckeslagstiftningen uppstod diskussioner kring åklagarens bevisbörda. Syftet med uppsatsen är att klargöra om bevisbördan påverkats av den nya lagstiftningen. Straffbestämmelsen om våldtäkt i sin nya lydelse innebär att gränsen mellan en straffri och straffbar gärning går vid om deltagandet i den sexuella handlingen är frivilligt. Ett frivilligt deltagande ska ha kommit till uttryck genom ord eller handling eller på annat sätt. Skillnaden kan sägas vara den att det inte längre krävs att gärningsmannen använt sig av våld eller hot för att handlingen ska anses vara straffbar som våldtäkt. Det är dock fortfarande åklagaren som har bevisbördan för att den sexuella handlingen har genomförts utan ett frivilligt deltagande.
Att bevisbördan i brottmål åvilar åklagaren beror på en grundläggande princip som råder inom alla rättsstater. Åklagaren definierar sin bevisbörda genom sin gärningsbeskrivning. Det innebär att åklagaren har bevisbördan för samtliga relevanta omständigheter i gärningspåståendet.
Anledningen till varför bevisbördan placerats på åklagaren torde vara för att motverka att det meddelas felaktiga domar. Åklagarens bevisbörda är dessutom förenat med ett högt beviskrav. Att bevisbördan vilar på någon innebär att personen ifråga står risken för att omständighetens existens inte går att utreda i målet samtidigt som ett beviskrav riktas mot denne. Beviskravet i brottmål innebär att det ska vara ställt utom rimligt tvivel att den tilltalade begått gärningen på det sätt som åklagaren påstått. Det ska alltså i princip inte finnas andra möjliga förklaringar än det händelseförlopp åklagaren angett. Beviskravet anger således bevisningens erforderliga styrka. Finner domstolen att åtalet är styrkt ska de värdera och granska den tilltalades förklaring och motbevisning. Den tilltalade kan sägas ha en falsk bevisbörda eller en förklaringsbörda som denne ska uppfylla annars står sig åklagarens bevisning. Att bevisbördan är förenat med ett högt beviskrav beror på att lagstiftaren vill eliminera risken för att oskyldiga ska dömas till ansvar. Det är ständigt en kamp mellan effektivitet och rättssäkerhet. (Less) - Abstract
- In connection with the new Swedish consent legislation, discussions arose around the prosecutor's burden of proof. The purpose of this paper is to clarify whether the burden of proof is affected by the new legislation. The punishment clause on rape in its new wording means that the boundary between a non-punishable and a criminal act goes on if participation in the sexual act is voluntary. Voluntary participation must have been expressed through words or actions or in other ways. It can be said that the difference is that it is no longer required that the perpetrator is using violence or threats for the act to be regarded as punishable as rape. However, it is still the prosecutor who has the burden of proof that the sexual act has been... (More)
- In connection with the new Swedish consent legislation, discussions arose around the prosecutor's burden of proof. The purpose of this paper is to clarify whether the burden of proof is affected by the new legislation. The punishment clause on rape in its new wording means that the boundary between a non-punishable and a criminal act goes on if participation in the sexual act is voluntary. Voluntary participation must have been expressed through words or actions or in other ways. It can be said that the difference is that it is no longer required that the perpetrator is using violence or threats for the act to be regarded as punishable as rape. However, it is still the prosecutor who has the burden of proof that the sexual act has been carried out without a voluntary participation.
The fact that the burden of proof in criminal cases is on the prosecutor depends on a fundamental principle prevailing in all the rule of law. The prosecutor defines his burden of proof through his description of the act. This means that the prosecutor has the burden of proof for all relevant circumstances in the allegation.
The reason why the burden of proof is placed on the prosecutor should be in order to counteract the wrong judgments being issued. The Prosecutor's burden of proof is also associated with a high degree of evidence. The fact that the burden of proof rests on someone means that the person in question stands the risk that the existence of the circumstance cannot be investigated in the case at the same time as a proof requirement is directed against it. The requirement for proof in criminal proceedings means that it must be made without reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the act in the manner that the prosecutor alleged. Thus, in principle, there should not be other possible explanations than the course of events the prosecutor stated. The requirement of proof thus indicates the requisite strength of the evidence. If the court finds that the prosecution is substantiated, they shall evaluate and examine the defendant's explanation and rebuttal. The person can be said to have a false proof burden or an explanation burden that this person must fulfill otherwise the prosecutor's proof stands. The fact that the burden of proof is associated with a high degree of evidence is because the legislator wants to eliminate the risk of innocents being sentenced to liability. It is constantly a struggle between efficiency and legal certainty. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8970258
- author
- Ewazzada, Nasim LU
- supervisor
-
- Jacob Öberg LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20182
- year
- 2018
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Straffrätt, Bevisbörda, Beviskrav, Våldtäkt, Samtyckeslagstiftning
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8970258
- date added to LUP
- 2019-04-09 15:32:39
- date last changed
- 2019-04-09 15:32:39
@misc{8970258,
abstract = {{In connection with the new Swedish consent legislation, discussions arose around the prosecutor's burden of proof. The purpose of this paper is to clarify whether the burden of proof is affected by the new legislation. The punishment clause on rape in its new wording means that the boundary between a non-punishable and a criminal act goes on if participation in the sexual act is voluntary. Voluntary participation must have been expressed through words or actions or in other ways. It can be said that the difference is that it is no longer required that the perpetrator is using violence or threats for the act to be regarded as punishable as rape. However, it is still the prosecutor who has the burden of proof that the sexual act has been carried out without a voluntary participation.
The fact that the burden of proof in criminal cases is on the prosecutor depends on a fundamental principle prevailing in all the rule of law. The prosecutor defines his burden of proof through his description of the act. This means that the prosecutor has the burden of proof for all relevant circumstances in the allegation.
The reason why the burden of proof is placed on the prosecutor should be in order to counteract the wrong judgments being issued. The Prosecutor's burden of proof is also associated with a high degree of evidence. The fact that the burden of proof rests on someone means that the person in question stands the risk that the existence of the circumstance cannot be investigated in the case at the same time as a proof requirement is directed against it. The requirement for proof in criminal proceedings means that it must be made without reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the act in the manner that the prosecutor alleged. Thus, in principle, there should not be other possible explanations than the course of events the prosecutor stated. The requirement of proof thus indicates the requisite strength of the evidence. If the court finds that the prosecution is substantiated, they shall evaluate and examine the defendant's explanation and rebuttal. The person can be said to have a false proof burden or an explanation burden that this person must fulfill otherwise the prosecutor's proof stands. The fact that the burden of proof is associated with a high degree of evidence is because the legislator wants to eliminate the risk of innocents being sentenced to liability. It is constantly a struggle between efficiency and legal certainty.}},
author = {{Ewazzada, Nasim}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Bevisbörda i brottmål i förhållande till den nya samtyckeslagstiftningen}},
year = {{2018}},
}