Inga kommentarer - En kommentar om den tilltalades tystnad i bevishänseende
(2020) LAGF03 20202Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- En grundläggande princip inom straffrätten är in dubio pro reo. Principen innebär att åklagaren bär bevisbördan i brottmål och att domaren i tveksamma fall ska döma till den tilltalades fördel. Denna princip ligger till grund för oskyldighetspresumtionen som innebär att en tilltalad ska presumeras vara oskyldig till motsatsen bevisas. Oskyldighetspresumtionen har indirekt tillämpats i svensk rätt sedan långt tillbaka i tiden. Sedan Sverige har inkorporerat europeiska konventionen om skydd för de mänskliga rättigheterna och de grundläggande friheterna har oskyldighetspresumtionen fått en utökad och mer väldefinierad omfattning. Detta då oskyldighetspresumtionen uttryckligen framgår av konventionens artikel 6.2 samt med beaktande av det... (More)
- En grundläggande princip inom straffrätten är in dubio pro reo. Principen innebär att åklagaren bär bevisbördan i brottmål och att domaren i tveksamma fall ska döma till den tilltalades fördel. Denna princip ligger till grund för oskyldighetspresumtionen som innebär att en tilltalad ska presumeras vara oskyldig till motsatsen bevisas. Oskyldighetspresumtionen har indirekt tillämpats i svensk rätt sedan långt tillbaka i tiden. Sedan Sverige har inkorporerat europeiska konventionen om skydd för de mänskliga rättigheterna och de grundläggande friheterna har oskyldighetspresumtionen fått en utökad och mer väldefinierad omfattning. Detta då oskyldighetspresumtionen uttryckligen framgår av konventionens artikel 6.2 samt med beaktande av det stora antal rättsfall som Europadomstolen har prövat angående artikelns innebörd. I svensk rätt har domaren genom lag givits möjlighet att pröva all bevisning som har framlagts i en rättegång. Det är sedan upp till domaren att värdera denna bevisning. Detta innebär att domaren bland annat kan tillmäta en tilltalads oförmåga att besvara frågor bevisvärde. Detta kan vid en första anblick tyckas stå i bjärt kontrast till oskyldighetspresumtionen och rätten till en rättvis rättegång. Genom ett antal domar och klargöranden från Europadomstolen har det givits vägledning för när och i vilken omfattning den tilltalades tystnad kan utgöra bevisning mot den tilltalade inom ramen för en rättvis rättegång. Att använda den tilltalades tystnad som bevisning mot den tilltalade utesluter inte att den tilltalade har fått en rättvis rättegång. Detta förutsatt att tystnaden inte utgör den huvudsakliga bevisningen i målet, att den tilltalade ej på ett oumbärligt tillvägagångssätt föranletts att bryta sin tystnad samt att den tilltalades tystnad endast tillmäts bevisverkan när det är påkallat med hänvisning till övrig bevisning i målet. (Less)
- Abstract
- A fundamental principle in criminal law is in dubio pro reo. The principle imply that the prosecutor bears the burden of proof in criminal cases and that the judge, when in doubt, must rule in favor of the accused. This principle is the basis for the presumption of innocence, which means that a defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The presumtion of innocence has been indirectly applied in Swedish law for a long time. Since Sweden has incorporated the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the presumtion of innocence has expanded and become more well-defined. This is due to that the presumtion of innocence is explicity stated in Article 6.2 of the Convention but also because of the large... (More)
- A fundamental principle in criminal law is in dubio pro reo. The principle imply that the prosecutor bears the burden of proof in criminal cases and that the judge, when in doubt, must rule in favor of the accused. This principle is the basis for the presumption of innocence, which means that a defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The presumtion of innocence has been indirectly applied in Swedish law for a long time. Since Sweden has incorporated the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the presumtion of innocence has expanded and become more well-defined. This is due to that the presumtion of innocence is explicity stated in Article 6.2 of the Convention but also because of the large number of legal cases that the Europeand Court of Justice has examined regarding the meaning of the article. In Sweden, the judge has been given the opportunity to try all evidence that has been presented in a trial. The judge will thereafter evaluate this evidence. This means that the judge have the possibility to attribute probative value to an accused’s inability to answer questions. At first glance, this may seem to stand in stark contrast to the presumtion of innocence and the right to a fair trial. Through a number of judgements and clarifications from the European Court of Justice, guidance has been provided as to when and to what extent the defendant’s silence may constitute evidence against the defendant within the frame of a fair trial. Using the defendant’s silence as evidence against the defendant does not preclude the defendant from having a fair trial. This provided that the silence does not constitute the main evidence in the case, that the defendant was not indispensably induced to break his silence and that the defendant’s silence is only alloted evidentiary effect when it is called for with reference to other evidence in the case. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9034630
- author
- Thanke Wiberg, Jens LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20202
- year
- 2020
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Straffrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9034630
- date added to LUP
- 2021-02-09 10:17:31
- date last changed
- 2021-02-09 10:17:31
@misc{9034630,
abstract = {{A fundamental principle in criminal law is in dubio pro reo. The principle imply that the prosecutor bears the burden of proof in criminal cases and that the judge, when in doubt, must rule in favor of the accused. This principle is the basis for the presumption of innocence, which means that a defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The presumtion of innocence has been indirectly applied in Swedish law for a long time. Since Sweden has incorporated the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the presumtion of innocence has expanded and become more well-defined. This is due to that the presumtion of innocence is explicity stated in Article 6.2 of the Convention but also because of the large number of legal cases that the Europeand Court of Justice has examined regarding the meaning of the article. In Sweden, the judge has been given the opportunity to try all evidence that has been presented in a trial. The judge will thereafter evaluate this evidence. This means that the judge have the possibility to attribute probative value to an accused’s inability to answer questions. At first glance, this may seem to stand in stark contrast to the presumtion of innocence and the right to a fair trial. Through a number of judgements and clarifications from the European Court of Justice, guidance has been provided as to when and to what extent the defendant’s silence may constitute evidence against the defendant within the frame of a fair trial. Using the defendant’s silence as evidence against the defendant does not preclude the defendant from having a fair trial. This provided that the silence does not constitute the main evidence in the case, that the defendant was not indispensably induced to break his silence and that the defendant’s silence is only alloted evidentiary effect when it is called for with reference to other evidence in the case.}},
author = {{Thanke Wiberg, Jens}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Inga kommentarer - En kommentar om den tilltalades tystnad i bevishänseende}},
year = {{2020}},
}