Uppgiftsrekvisitet och konstitutionell rättstillämpning - En rättslig analys av hovrättens argumentation i Hermanssonmålet
(2022) LAGF03 20221Faculty of Law
Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Under sin tid som kommunstyrelsens ordförande i Göteborgs Stad pekade Ann-Sofie Hermansson ut två muslimska aktivister som extrema politiska aktörer på sin personliga blogg. Efter att kvinnorna väckt enskilt åtal mot Hermansson för grovt förtal följde en rättsprocess som avslutades i och med Hovrätten för Västra Sveriges dom där Hermansson friades. I hovrättens avgörande ställs frågan om vad som är en godtagbar inskränkning av den grundlagsstadgade yttrandefriheten på sin spets. Uppsatsen undersöker hållbarheten i hovrättens rättsliga resonemang med särskilt fokus på hovrättens behandling av uppgiftsrekvisitet i förtalsbrottet och hovrättens konstitutionella argumentation. Därtill föreslås alternativa rättsliga lösningar i den mån... (More)
- Under sin tid som kommunstyrelsens ordförande i Göteborgs Stad pekade Ann-Sofie Hermansson ut två muslimska aktivister som extrema politiska aktörer på sin personliga blogg. Efter att kvinnorna väckt enskilt åtal mot Hermansson för grovt förtal följde en rättsprocess som avslutades i och med Hovrätten för Västra Sveriges dom där Hermansson friades. I hovrättens avgörande ställs frågan om vad som är en godtagbar inskränkning av den grundlagsstadgade yttrandefriheten på sin spets. Uppsatsen undersöker hållbarheten i hovrättens rättsliga resonemang med särskilt fokus på hovrättens behandling av uppgiftsrekvisitet i förtalsbrottet och hovrättens konstitutionella argumentation. Därtill föreslås alternativa rättsliga lösningar i den mån hovrättens argumentation bedöms ohållbar i uppsatsen.
Hovrättens slutsats i avgörandet är att åtalet ska ogillas eftersom Hermanssons uttalanden inte utgör uppgifter i förtalsbestämmelsens mening. Den tolkning av uppgiftsrekvisitet som hovrätten presenterar i avgörandet har ett svagt stöd i rättskällorna. Uppgiftsrekvisitet i förtalsbrottet ska enligt förarbeten och prejudikat från HD ges en vidsträckt tillämpning. Hovrättens tolkning bedöms därför ohållbar i denna del.
Utifrån förarbeten till den nuvarande normprövningsbestämmelsen och Högsta domstolens avgörande i Mangamålet har en tolkningsmetod för konstitutionell rätt utkristalliserats som torde vara gällande rätt efter ändringen av normprövningsbestämmelsen 2010. Denna tolkningsmetod har stöd i doktrin trots att vissa meningsskiljaktigheter förekommer. Utifrån denna tolkningsmetod kritiseras hovrättens avgörande i förtalsmålet. Den konstitutionella metod hovrätten nyttjar i målet för att tillämpa uppgiftsrekvisitet på ett restriktivt sätt bedöms ohållbar. Till stöd för denna kritik läggs det fram argument för att hovrättens konstitutionella metod har ett svagt stöd i rättskällorna, leder till ett svårföljt rättsligt resonemang och misslyckas med att tillvarata den konstitutionella rättstillämpningen bakomliggande ändamål.
Som alternativ till hovrättens argumentation föreslås att målet borde avgjorts genom normprövning av förtalsbestämmelsen enligt 11. kap 14 § RF eller genom en sedvanlig straffrättslig tolkning av förtalsbestämmelsen utan direkt inverkan av konstitutionella bestämmelser. (Less) - Abstract
- During her time as chairman of the City Executive Board of Gothenburg, Ann-Sofie Hermansson posted claims about two muslim activists on her blog, calling the activists extremist political actors. Due to this the activists commenced private prosecution against Hermansson for gross defamation, The legal process that followed ended with the Court of Appeal for Western Sweden's ruling where Hermansson was acquitted. In the ruling of the Court of Appeal, the issue of what constitutes an acceptable infringement of the constitutional freedom of expression is central. This thesis examines the tenability of the Court of Appeal's legal reasoning, especially regarding the Court of Appeal's constitutional argumentation and interpretation of the... (More)
- During her time as chairman of the City Executive Board of Gothenburg, Ann-Sofie Hermansson posted claims about two muslim activists on her blog, calling the activists extremist political actors. Due to this the activists commenced private prosecution against Hermansson for gross defamation, The legal process that followed ended with the Court of Appeal for Western Sweden's ruling where Hermansson was acquitted. In the ruling of the Court of Appeal, the issue of what constitutes an acceptable infringement of the constitutional freedom of expression is central. This thesis examines the tenability of the Court of Appeal's legal reasoning, especially regarding the Court of Appeal's constitutional argumentation and interpretation of the “information-requisite” in the defamation provision. In addition, alternative legal solutions are proposed insofar as the Court of Appeal's legal argumentation is deemed untenable.
The Court of Appeal's conclusion in the ruling is that the prosecution is to be dismissed due to fact that Hermansson's statements do not communicate information in such a way that the defamation provision is applicable. The interpretation of the “information-requisite” that the Court of Appeal applies has weak support in the sources of law. According to preparatory works and precedents from the Supreme Court, the “information-requisite” in the defamation provision is applicable in a wide variety of situation, including in the present case. This thesis therefore deems the Court of Appeals reasoning untenable in its application of the “information-requisite”.
Based on preparatory works for the judicial review provision and the Supreme Court's ruling in the Manga-case, this thesis argues that an interpretative method for constitutional law has crystallized which should be considered applicable law following the amendment of the judicial review provision in 2010. The Court of Appeal's ruling in the Hermansson-case is therefore criticized for its non-compliance with the applicable constitutional interpretative method and the interpretative method used by the Court of Appeal to apply the “information-requisite” in a restrictive manner is deemed untenable. In support of this, arguments are put forth to demonstrate that the Court of Appeal's constitutional method has weak support in the sources of law, leads to legal reasoning that is difficult to follow and fails to safeguard the aims and purposes of judicial review.
As an alternative to the Court of Appeal's argumentation, this thesis proposes that the case should have been resolved by judicial review of the defamation provision in accordance with Chapter 11 Section 14 of the Instrument of Government, or by standard criminal law interpretation of the defamation provision without regard to constitutional provisions. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9081133
- author
- Sveréus, Gustaf LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20221
- year
- 2022
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- straffrätt, statsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9081133
- date added to LUP
- 2022-06-28 11:21:11
- date last changed
- 2022-06-28 11:21:11
@misc{9081133,
abstract = {{During her time as chairman of the City Executive Board of Gothenburg, Ann-Sofie Hermansson posted claims about two muslim activists on her blog, calling the activists extremist political actors. Due to this the activists commenced private prosecution against Hermansson for gross defamation, The legal process that followed ended with the Court of Appeal for Western Sweden's ruling where Hermansson was acquitted. In the ruling of the Court of Appeal, the issue of what constitutes an acceptable infringement of the constitutional freedom of expression is central. This thesis examines the tenability of the Court of Appeal's legal reasoning, especially regarding the Court of Appeal's constitutional argumentation and interpretation of the “information-requisite” in the defamation provision. In addition, alternative legal solutions are proposed insofar as the Court of Appeal's legal argumentation is deemed untenable.
The Court of Appeal's conclusion in the ruling is that the prosecution is to be dismissed due to fact that Hermansson's statements do not communicate information in such a way that the defamation provision is applicable. The interpretation of the “information-requisite” that the Court of Appeal applies has weak support in the sources of law. According to preparatory works and precedents from the Supreme Court, the “information-requisite” in the defamation provision is applicable in a wide variety of situation, including in the present case. This thesis therefore deems the Court of Appeals reasoning untenable in its application of the “information-requisite”.
Based on preparatory works for the judicial review provision and the Supreme Court's ruling in the Manga-case, this thesis argues that an interpretative method for constitutional law has crystallized which should be considered applicable law following the amendment of the judicial review provision in 2010. The Court of Appeal's ruling in the Hermansson-case is therefore criticized for its non-compliance with the applicable constitutional interpretative method and the interpretative method used by the Court of Appeal to apply the “information-requisite” in a restrictive manner is deemed untenable. In support of this, arguments are put forth to demonstrate that the Court of Appeal's constitutional method has weak support in the sources of law, leads to legal reasoning that is difficult to follow and fails to safeguard the aims and purposes of judicial review.
As an alternative to the Court of Appeal's argumentation, this thesis proposes that the case should have been resolved by judicial review of the defamation provision in accordance with Chapter 11 Section 14 of the Instrument of Government, or by standard criminal law interpretation of the defamation provision without regard to constitutional provisions.}},
author = {{Sveréus, Gustaf}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Uppgiftsrekvisitet och konstitutionell rättstillämpning - En rättslig analys av hovrättens argumentation i Hermanssonmålet}},
year = {{2022}},
}