Implementering av barnkonventionen - En komparativ uppsats om implementeringen av FN:s barnkonvention i Sverige och Norge.
(2021) LAGF03 20211Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- This thesis is written from a comparative perspective using a comparative method with the purpose to examine and compare the Swedish and Norwegian implementations of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In Norway, the convention was ratified in 1991 and thereafter passively implemented by the establishment of legal harmony between national law and the convention. The method was, in some areas, considered insufficient, and the work towards a more active implementation began shortly after. This partly led to a transformation of the convention into national legislation, partly to an incorporation of the convention in 2003. Since then, complementary implementational work has been done, mainly through the method of... (More) - This thesis is written from a comparative perspective using a comparative method with the purpose to examine and compare the Swedish and Norwegian implementations of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In Norway, the convention was ratified in 1991 and thereafter passively implemented by the establishment of legal harmony between national law and the convention. The method was, in some areas, considered insufficient, and the work towards a more active implementation began shortly after. This partly led to a transformation of the convention into national legislation, partly to an incorporation of the convention in 2003. Since then, complementary implementational work has been done, mainly through the method of transformation, but also through, for example, educational work. The process has had a strengthening effect for both the convention and for children’s rights.
In Sweden, the convention was ratified in 1990, and just like in Norway it was initially implemented passively by the establishment of legal harmony. Shortly after, a more active implementation was wished for, again like in Norway, whereafter a thorough transformative work was executed, resulting in multiple legislative changes. The effects thereof have for instance been that children’s rights and interests have received an increased legal protection. The process of incorporation was considerably longer in Sweden than in Norway and the convention was not incorporated in Sweden until 2020, wherefore some of the effects are, as of now, hard to document.
The thesis concludes with a comparative analysis where the Norwegian and Swedish implementations are discussed in relation to each other. It is concluded that the processes are much alike, except for the different timings of the incorporations. From a technical perspective, it is stated partly that Sweden, unlike Norway, chose not to incorporate the convention in its entirety, partly that the convention has received a stronger legal position through the incorporation in Norway than in Sweden, as Norway has given it priority over national law. Finally, it is established that the effects of the two slightly different methods are much alike and that both countries have done a good job implementing the convention, but that the implementation in Norway has, to some extent, been slightly more effective. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Denna uppsats är skriven ur ett komparativt perspektiv med en komparativ rättsvetenskaplig metod i syfte att undersöka och jämföra den svenska och norska implementeringen av de Förenta nationernas konvention om barnets rättigheter.
I Norge ratificerades konventionen 1991 och implementerades passivt genom att normharmoni konstaterades mellan konventionen och nationell rätt. Metoden ansågs till viss del vara otillräcklig och ett arbete för en mer aktiv implementering inleddes kort därefter. Arbetet ledde till att konventionen dels transformerades in i nationell lagstiftning, dels inkorporerades 2003. Därefter har ett fortsatt implementeringsarbete utförts, framför allt genom transformering, men också genom till exempel ökade kunskaper... (More) - Denna uppsats är skriven ur ett komparativt perspektiv med en komparativ rättsvetenskaplig metod i syfte att undersöka och jämföra den svenska och norska implementeringen av de Förenta nationernas konvention om barnets rättigheter.
I Norge ratificerades konventionen 1991 och implementerades passivt genom att normharmoni konstaterades mellan konventionen och nationell rätt. Metoden ansågs till viss del vara otillräcklig och ett arbete för en mer aktiv implementering inleddes kort därefter. Arbetet ledde till att konventionen dels transformerades in i nationell lagstiftning, dels inkorporerades 2003. Därefter har ett fortsatt implementeringsarbete utförts, framför allt genom transformering, men också genom till exempel ökade kunskaper gällande tillämpning av konventionen. Arbetet har haft en stärkande effekt för både barns och konventionens rättsliga ställning.
I Sverige ratificerades konventionen 1990, och liksom i Norge implementerades den inledningsvis passivt genom att normharmoni konstaterades. Även i Sverige önskades dock snart en mer aktiv inarbetning, varefter ett genomgripande transformerande arbete utfördes genom lagändringar. Insatserna har bland annat lett till att barns rättigheter och intressen fått ett utökat rättsligt skydd. Processen till inkorporering var betydligt längre i Sverige än i Norge, och det var inte förrän 2020 konventionen blev lag i Sverige, varför effekterna därav till viss del ännu är svåra att konstatera.
Uppsatsen avslutas med en komparativ analys där den norska och svenska implementeringen diskuteras i förhållande till varandra. Här dras bland annat slutsatsen att processerna till stora delar är lika, med undantag för de olika inkorporeringstidpunkterna. Ur ett lagtekniskt perspektiv konstateras dels att Sverige valt att, till skillnad från Norge, inte inkorporera konventionen i dess helhet, dels att konventionen genom inkorporeringen i Norge fått en starkare rättslig ställning än i Sverige, detta eftersom Norge gett den företräde framför övrig nationell rätt. Det fastställs slutligen att effekterna mellan de något olika metoderna inte skiljer sig väsentligt åt och att både Sverige och Norge utfört ett gott arbete med att inarbeta konventionen, men att Norges metod kan anses ha varit något mer effektfull. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9045574
- author
- Hellberg, Anna LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20211
- year
- 2021
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Familjerätt, folkrätt, förvaltningsrätt, komparativ rätt, barnkonventionen.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9045574
- date added to LUP
- 2021-06-29 16:45:26
- date last changed
- 2021-06-29 16:45:26
@misc{9045574,
abstract = {{This thesis is written from a comparative perspective using a comparative method with the purpose to examine and compare the Swedish and Norwegian implementations of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In Norway, the convention was ratified in 1991 and thereafter passively implemented by the establishment of legal harmony between national law and the convention. The method was, in some areas, considered insufficient, and the work towards a more active implementation began shortly after. This partly led to a transformation of the convention into national legislation, partly to an incorporation of the convention in 2003. Since then, complementary implementational work has been done, mainly through the method of transformation, but also through, for example, educational work. The process has had a strengthening effect for both the convention and for children’s rights.
In Sweden, the convention was ratified in 1990, and just like in Norway it was initially implemented passively by the establishment of legal harmony. Shortly after, a more active implementation was wished for, again like in Norway, whereafter a thorough transformative work was executed, resulting in multiple legislative changes. The effects thereof have for instance been that children’s rights and interests have received an increased legal protection. The process of incorporation was considerably longer in Sweden than in Norway and the convention was not incorporated in Sweden until 2020, wherefore some of the effects are, as of now, hard to document.
The thesis concludes with a comparative analysis where the Norwegian and Swedish implementations are discussed in relation to each other. It is concluded that the processes are much alike, except for the different timings of the incorporations. From a technical perspective, it is stated partly that Sweden, unlike Norway, chose not to incorporate the convention in its entirety, partly that the convention has received a stronger legal position through the incorporation in Norway than in Sweden, as Norway has given it priority over national law. Finally, it is established that the effects of the two slightly different methods are much alike and that both countries have done a good job implementing the convention, but that the implementation in Norway has, to some extent, been slightly more effective.}},
author = {{Hellberg, Anna}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Implementering av barnkonventionen - En komparativ uppsats om implementeringen av FN:s barnkonvention i Sverige och Norge.}},
year = {{2021}},
}