Svensk mutlagstiftning - lite för lagom? En rättsvetenskaplig studie om svensk mutlagstiftning ur ett EU-rättsligt perspektiv
(2020) HARH13 20201Department of Business Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Sverige, ett av de minst korrupta länderna i världen, har fått återkommande internationell kritik gällande ineffektivitet i svensk mutlagstiftning när det kommer till straffrättsliga sanktioner mot företag som begått mutbrott. Detta på grund av bristen på rättspraxis där företag gjort sig skyldiga till vårdslös finansiering av mutbrott. Kritiken har bland annat kommit från EU-kommissionen då Sverige som medlemsstat i EU måste förhålla sig till de EU-rättsliga bestämmelser som unionens lagstiftande institutioner fastställer. Som resultat av detta har Sverige genomfört ett flertal ändringar i svensk mutlagstiftning för att uppfylla sina internationella åtaganden. I januari 2020 ikraftträdde den nya företagsboten med ett förhöjt maxbelopp... (More)
- Sverige, ett av de minst korrupta länderna i världen, har fått återkommande internationell kritik gällande ineffektivitet i svensk mutlagstiftning när det kommer till straffrättsliga sanktioner mot företag som begått mutbrott. Detta på grund av bristen på rättspraxis där företag gjort sig skyldiga till vårdslös finansiering av mutbrott. Kritiken har bland annat kommit från EU-kommissionen då Sverige som medlemsstat i EU måste förhålla sig till de EU-rättsliga bestämmelser som unionens lagstiftande institutioner fastställer. Som resultat av detta har Sverige genomfört ett flertal ändringar i svensk mutlagstiftning för att uppfylla sina internationella åtaganden. I januari 2020 ikraftträdde den nya företagsboten med ett förhöjt maxbelopp till 500 miljoner kronor med syftet att bemöta kritiken. Denna uppsats undersöker om den nya företagsboten medför att svensk mutlagtsiftning uppfyller EU:s direktiv 2017/1371 krav på effektiva, proportionerliga och avskräckande sanktioner mot företag. Resultatet i uppsatsen visar på att den nya företagsboten kan ses som en mer proportionerlig och avskräckande sanktion. Däremot påverkar troligen inte ett förhöjt maxbelopp effektiviteten i svensk mutlagstiftning då man först måste fastställa att ett företag gjort sig skyldig till mutbrott för att företagsboten ska bli applicerbar för juridiska personer i detta syfte. Bristen på rättspraxis kopplat till detta försvårar argumentationen för att svensk mutlagstiftning har effektiva sanktioner mot företag. (Less)
- Abstract
- Sweden, as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, has been subject to recurrent critique regarding inefficiency in its bribery legislation, especially regarding sanctions against corporates. The reason behind this is due to the lack of case-law when it comes to companies being directly or indirectly responsible for bribery. The European Commission have criticised Sweden due to the fact that Sweden as a Member State of the EU, needs to follow EU-law. As a result, Sweden has carried out a number of changes in its bribery legislation to fulfil its international obligations. In January 2020, an adjustment to the Swedish legislation regarding corporate sanctions came into force which resulted in an increase of the monetary limit to... (More)
- Sweden, as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, has been subject to recurrent critique regarding inefficiency in its bribery legislation, especially regarding sanctions against corporates. The reason behind this is due to the lack of case-law when it comes to companies being directly or indirectly responsible for bribery. The European Commission have criticised Sweden due to the fact that Sweden as a Member State of the EU, needs to follow EU-law. As a result, Sweden has carried out a number of changes in its bribery legislation to fulfil its international obligations. In January 2020, an adjustment to the Swedish legislation regarding corporate sanctions came into force which resulted in an increase of the monetary limit to 500 million SEK. The purpose with this adjustment to the legislation was to respond to the critique. This essay examines whether or not the new rules about corporate sanctions results in Sweden fulfilling the EU Directive 2017/1371 demands on effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions against corporates. The result of the essay shows that the new regulations regarding corporate sanctions can be recognized as more proportionate and dissuasive. However, since a legal person first needs to be held accountable for direct or indirect responsibility for bribery, before being an object to corporate sanctions, the new regulations regarding corporate sanctions does not affect the effectivity in Swedish bribery law. The lack of case-law in this area makes it difficult to argue that Swedish bribery law has effective sanctions against corporates. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9016790
- author
- Lindström, Desirée LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- HARH13 20201
- year
- 2020
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- vårdslös finansiering av mutbrott, företagsbot, direktiv 2017/1371, proportionalitetsprincipen
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9016790
- date added to LUP
- 2020-06-12 11:36:28
- date last changed
- 2020-06-12 11:36:28
@misc{9016790,
abstract = {{Sweden, as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, has been subject to recurrent critique regarding inefficiency in its bribery legislation, especially regarding sanctions against corporates. The reason behind this is due to the lack of case-law when it comes to companies being directly or indirectly responsible for bribery. The European Commission have criticised Sweden due to the fact that Sweden as a Member State of the EU, needs to follow EU-law. As a result, Sweden has carried out a number of changes in its bribery legislation to fulfil its international obligations. In January 2020, an adjustment to the Swedish legislation regarding corporate sanctions came into force which resulted in an increase of the monetary limit to 500 million SEK. The purpose with this adjustment to the legislation was to respond to the critique. This essay examines whether or not the new rules about corporate sanctions results in Sweden fulfilling the EU Directive 2017/1371 demands on effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions against corporates. The result of the essay shows that the new regulations regarding corporate sanctions can be recognized as more proportionate and dissuasive. However, since a legal person first needs to be held accountable for direct or indirect responsibility for bribery, before being an object to corporate sanctions, the new regulations regarding corporate sanctions does not affect the effectivity in Swedish bribery law. The lack of case-law in this area makes it difficult to argue that Swedish bribery law has effective sanctions against corporates.}},
author = {{Lindström, Desirée}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Svensk mutlagstiftning - lite för lagom? En rättsvetenskaplig studie om svensk mutlagstiftning ur ett EU-rättsligt perspektiv}},
year = {{2020}},
}