Rätt säker brottsbekämpning eller rättssäker brottsbekämpning? – En systemteoretisk granskning av avvägningen mellan effektiv brottsbekämpning och materiell rättssäkerhet utifrån den tilltalades centrala rättigheter.
(2021) JURM02 20211Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- I samhällsdebatten har åsikter om en mer effektiv brottsbekämpning växt
fram på den senaste tiden. Debatten har utmynnat i flertalet offentliga
utredningar som presenterar potentiella lagändringar. Förslagen innebär att en avvägning måste göras mellan effektiv brottsbekämpning och rättssäkerhet, eftersom dessa medför en stor risk att individens rättigheter inskränks.
Syftet med uppsatsen är att belysa avvägningen mellan effektiv
brottsbekämpning och materiell rättssäkerhet utifrån den tilltalades centrala rättigheter. Uppsatsen utgörs av en systemteoretisk granskning av brottmålsprocessens samhällsfunktion och hur den funktionen kan förändras genom nu aktuella utredningar. En dikotomi baserad på Herbert L. Packers modeller om... (More) - I samhällsdebatten har åsikter om en mer effektiv brottsbekämpning växt
fram på den senaste tiden. Debatten har utmynnat i flertalet offentliga
utredningar som presenterar potentiella lagändringar. Förslagen innebär att en avvägning måste göras mellan effektiv brottsbekämpning och rättssäkerhet, eftersom dessa medför en stor risk att individens rättigheter inskränks.
Syftet med uppsatsen är att belysa avvägningen mellan effektiv
brottsbekämpning och materiell rättssäkerhet utifrån den tilltalades centrala rättigheter. Uppsatsen utgörs av en systemteoretisk granskning av brottmålsprocessens samhällsfunktion och hur den funktionen kan förändras genom nu aktuella utredningar. En dikotomi baserad på Herbert L. Packers modeller om brottmålsprocessens funktion uppställs som uppsatsens teoretiska ramverk. Dikotomin består av två delar. Den ena delen består av brottsbekämpningsmodellen och den andra av rättssäkerhetsmodellen. För att den ena aspekten ska öka, måste den andra minska.
Uppsatsen inleder med att presentera ett urval av brottmålsprocessens
funktioner. Processen har i huvudsak två motstående intressen;
brottsbekämpning och rättssäkerhet. Därefter utreds den rättsliga regleringen kring den tilltalades rättigheter.
Framställningen av den tilltalades centrala rättigheter använder sig
huvudsakligen av artikel 6.1 i Europakonventionen i förening med
rättegångsbalkens bestämmelser. Principen om parternas likställdhet,
principen om ett kontradiktoriskt förfarande, rätten till insyn och rätten till att förhöra vittnen presenteras som centrala rättigheter för den tilltalade. Med hjälp av den presenterade dikotomin kan rättigheterna analyseras och det kan konstateras att den tilltalades centrala rättigheter väger tyngst i brottmålsprocessens nuvarande ordning.
Uppsatsen presenterar sedan två förslag som diskuterats i samhällsdebatten, som får anses spegla debatten i stort, tidiga förhör och anonyma vittnen. Analysen av lagförslagen förutsätter att de implementeras fullt ut. Resultatet av analysen blir att brottmålsprocessens funktion blir effektiv brottsbekämpning, och inte längre rättssäkerhet. Uppsatsens slutsats blir därmed att vi lämnar rättssäkerheten alltmer när vi försöker införa regler som syftar till att bidra till en effektiv brottsbekämpning. (Less) - Abstract
- In the public debate, opinions about more effective law enforcement have
emerged in recent years. The debate has resulted in public investigations that present potential changes to the law. The proposals imply that a balance must be struck between effective law enforcement and the rule of law, as the proposals entails a great risk for the rights of the individual to be restricted.
The purpose of the thesis is to shed light on the balancing act between
effective law enforcement and material legal certainty based on the
defendant’s central rights. The thesis consists of a systems theory
examination of the criminal function of the criminal process and how that
function can be changed based on the current investigations. A dichotomy
... (More) - In the public debate, opinions about more effective law enforcement have
emerged in recent years. The debate has resulted in public investigations that present potential changes to the law. The proposals imply that a balance must be struck between effective law enforcement and the rule of law, as the proposals entails a great risk for the rights of the individual to be restricted.
The purpose of the thesis is to shed light on the balancing act between
effective law enforcement and material legal certainty based on the
defendant’s central rights. The thesis consists of a systems theory
examination of the criminal function of the criminal process and how that
function can be changed based on the current investigations. A dichotomy
based on Herbert L. Packer’s models of the function of the criminal process is used as the theoretical framework of the essay. The dichotomy consists of two parts. One part consists of the crime control model and the other of the due process model. For one aspect to increase, the other must decrease.
Initially, the thesis begins by presenting a selection of the functions of the criminal process. The process essentially has two opposing interests: law enforcement and the rule of law. The legal regulation regarding the defendant’s rights is then investigated.
The presentation of the defendant’s central rights mainly uses Article 6.1 of the European Convention in conjunction with the provisions of the Code of Judicial Procedure. The principle of equality between the parties, the principle of an adversarial procedure, the right of access and the right to interrogate witnesses are presented as central rights of the accused. With the help of the presented dichotomy, the rights can be analyzed, and it can be stated that the defendant’s central rights weigh heaviest in the current order of the criminal proceedings.
The essay then presents two proposals that have been discussed in the public debate, which may be considered to reflect the debate in general, early interrogations and anonymous witnesses. The analysis of the proposals presupposes that they are fully implemented. The result of the analysis is that the function of the criminal process will be effective law enforcement, the legal certainty is no longer the main focus. The thesis’ conclusion is thus that we leave legal certainty more and more when we try to introduce rules that aim to contribute to an effective fight against crime. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9046222
- author
- Everitt, Mathilda LU
- supervisor
-
- Karol Nowak LU
- organization
- alternative title
- Fairly secure law enforcement or legally secure law enforcement? – A systems theory examination of the balance between effective law enforcement and substantive legal certainty based on the defendant's central rights.
- course
- JURM02 20211
- year
- 2021
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- straffrätt, processrätt, tilltalads rättigheter, brottsbekämpning, rättssäkerhet
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9046222
- date added to LUP
- 2021-06-15 08:33:09
- date last changed
- 2021-06-15 08:33:09
@misc{9046222,
abstract = {{In the public debate, opinions about more effective law enforcement have
emerged in recent years. The debate has resulted in public investigations that present potential changes to the law. The proposals imply that a balance must be struck between effective law enforcement and the rule of law, as the proposals entails a great risk for the rights of the individual to be restricted.
The purpose of the thesis is to shed light on the balancing act between
effective law enforcement and material legal certainty based on the
defendant’s central rights. The thesis consists of a systems theory
examination of the criminal function of the criminal process and how that
function can be changed based on the current investigations. A dichotomy
based on Herbert L. Packer’s models of the function of the criminal process is used as the theoretical framework of the essay. The dichotomy consists of two parts. One part consists of the crime control model and the other of the due process model. For one aspect to increase, the other must decrease.
Initially, the thesis begins by presenting a selection of the functions of the criminal process. The process essentially has two opposing interests: law enforcement and the rule of law. The legal regulation regarding the defendant’s rights is then investigated.
The presentation of the defendant’s central rights mainly uses Article 6.1 of the European Convention in conjunction with the provisions of the Code of Judicial Procedure. The principle of equality between the parties, the principle of an adversarial procedure, the right of access and the right to interrogate witnesses are presented as central rights of the accused. With the help of the presented dichotomy, the rights can be analyzed, and it can be stated that the defendant’s central rights weigh heaviest in the current order of the criminal proceedings.
The essay then presents two proposals that have been discussed in the public debate, which may be considered to reflect the debate in general, early interrogations and anonymous witnesses. The analysis of the proposals presupposes that they are fully implemented. The result of the analysis is that the function of the criminal process will be effective law enforcement, the legal certainty is no longer the main focus. The thesis’ conclusion is thus that we leave legal certainty more and more when we try to introduce rules that aim to contribute to an effective fight against crime.}},
author = {{Everitt, Mathilda}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Rätt säker brottsbekämpning eller rättssäker brottsbekämpning? – En systemteoretisk granskning av avvägningen mellan effektiv brottsbekämpning och materiell rättssäkerhet utifrån den tilltalades centrala rättigheter.}},
year = {{2021}},
}