Utvidgat ansvar för kommunfullmäktige - Till vilken grad ska fullmäktige hållas ansvarig?
(2019) LAGF03 20192Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- The regulation on misuse of office can be found in chapter 20 § 1 of the Swedish Penal Code which means that a person who in the exercise of public authority, by act or by commission, intentionally or through carelessness, disregards the duties of his office can be held liable. Today, elected representatives cannot be held accountable for their decisions as they hold a partial responsibility. This partial responsibility is based on the fact that the municipal council is appointed through democratic elections and it would therefore seem peculiar if the council has to be accountable for a majority decision. The limited responsibility of the Council also arises from the fact that they rarely exercise public authority, which is noted in... (More)
- The regulation on misuse of office can be found in chapter 20 § 1 of the Swedish Penal Code which means that a person who in the exercise of public authority, by act or by commission, intentionally or through carelessness, disregards the duties of his office can be held liable. Today, elected representatives cannot be held accountable for their decisions as they hold a partial responsibility. This partial responsibility is based on the fact that the municipal council is appointed through democratic elections and it would therefore seem peculiar if the council has to be accountable for a majority decision. The limited responsibility of the Council also arises from the fact that they rarely exercise public authority, which is noted in “Gullspångsfallet”, NJA 1988 p. 26. In this essay it will be discussed whether there are advantages and disadvantages about an extended responsibility for the Council. Based on the discussion, proposals for extended liability through JO and financial penalties will be presented in the conclusion. (Less)
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Bestämmelsen om tjänstefel återfinns i 20 kap. 1 § Brottsbalken vilket innebär att den som vid myndighetsutövning, uppsåtligen eller av oaktsamhet, åsidosätter vad som gäller för uppgiften genom handling eller underlåtenhet kan ställas till svars. Idag omfattas inte de kommunalt förtroendevalda i den högre beslutande förvaltningen av detta ansvar då de besitter ett partiellt ämbetsansvar. Detta partiella ämbetsansvar grundar sig i att kommunfullmäktige blir utsedd genom demokratiska val och det skulle därmed verka egendomlig om fullmäktige sedan ska behöva stå till svars för majoritetsbeslut. Fullmäktiges begränsade ansvar grundar sig också i att de sällan utövar myndighetsutövning, vilket uppmärksammas i Gullspångsfallet, NJA 1988 s. 26.... (More)
- Bestämmelsen om tjänstefel återfinns i 20 kap. 1 § Brottsbalken vilket innebär att den som vid myndighetsutövning, uppsåtligen eller av oaktsamhet, åsidosätter vad som gäller för uppgiften genom handling eller underlåtenhet kan ställas till svars. Idag omfattas inte de kommunalt förtroendevalda i den högre beslutande förvaltningen av detta ansvar då de besitter ett partiellt ämbetsansvar. Detta partiella ämbetsansvar grundar sig i att kommunfullmäktige blir utsedd genom demokratiska val och det skulle därmed verka egendomlig om fullmäktige sedan ska behöva stå till svars för majoritetsbeslut. Fullmäktiges begränsade ansvar grundar sig också i att de sällan utövar myndighetsutövning, vilket uppmärksammas i Gullspångsfallet, NJA 1988 s. 26. I denna uppsats kommer det diskuteras huruvida det finns fördelar respektive nackdelar med en utvidgning av fullmäktiges begränsade ansvar. Utifrån diskussionen lämnas även förslag för ett utvidgat ansvar genom JO och ekonomiska sanktioner. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9000012
- author
- Hamilton, Malcolm LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20192
- year
- 2019
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- straffrätt (en. criminal law), offentlig rätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9000012
- date added to LUP
- 2020-04-09 13:26:12
- date last changed
- 2020-04-09 13:26:12
@misc{9000012,
abstract = {{The regulation on misuse of office can be found in chapter 20 § 1 of the Swedish Penal Code which means that a person who in the exercise of public authority, by act or by commission, intentionally or through carelessness, disregards the duties of his office can be held liable. Today, elected representatives cannot be held accountable for their decisions as they hold a partial responsibility. This partial responsibility is based on the fact that the municipal council is appointed through democratic elections and it would therefore seem peculiar if the council has to be accountable for a majority decision. The limited responsibility of the Council also arises from the fact that they rarely exercise public authority, which is noted in “Gullspångsfallet”, NJA 1988 p. 26. In this essay it will be discussed whether there are advantages and disadvantages about an extended responsibility for the Council. Based on the discussion, proposals for extended liability through JO and financial penalties will be presented in the conclusion.}},
author = {{Hamilton, Malcolm}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Utvidgat ansvar för kommunfullmäktige - Till vilken grad ska fullmäktige hållas ansvarig?}},
year = {{2019}},
}