Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Godtycklig straffskärpning? - Om ungdomsreduktionen utifrån proportionalitet- och humanitetsprincipen.

Linné, Johanna LU (2022) JURM02 20221
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Det har funnits en tradition i det svenska påföljdssystemet att särbehandla unga myndiga. Den 2 januari 2022 slopades delvis ungdomsreduktionen. Underlaget för den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen bestod av betänkandet Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vilket utgjorde underlag för propositionen Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet. Propositionen ledde till att ungdomsreduktionen delvis slopades för lagöverträdare i åldersgruppen 18-20 år. Den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen innebär att domstolen inte särskilt ska beakta den tilltalades ungdom vid straffmätningen när allvarliga brott har begåtts av någon som har fyllt 18 år.

Uppsatsen syftar till att undersöka huruvida den delvis slopade... (More)
Det har funnits en tradition i det svenska påföljdssystemet att särbehandla unga myndiga. Den 2 januari 2022 slopades delvis ungdomsreduktionen. Underlaget för den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen bestod av betänkandet Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vilket utgjorde underlag för propositionen Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet. Propositionen ledde till att ungdomsreduktionen delvis slopades för lagöverträdare i åldersgruppen 18-20 år. Den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen innebär att domstolen inte särskilt ska beakta den tilltalades ungdom vid straffmätningen när allvarliga brott har begåtts av någon som har fyllt 18 år.

Uppsatsen syftar till att undersöka huruvida den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen, utifrån lagstiftarens argument i propositionen Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet, kan anses vara förenlig med principerna om proportionalitet och humanitet. Det svenska straffsystemet vilar bland annat på principerna om proportionalitet och humanitet. En förändrad straffnivå bör därför motiveras utifrån omständigheter som är relevanta för straffnivån enligt principerna om proportionalitet och humanitet. Som argument för att delvis slopa ungdomsreduktionen framför regeringen att vid allvarlig brottslighet leder en tillämpning av ungdomsreduktionen till att straffet inte står i proportion till brottets allvar. Vidare anför regeringen att vad gäller unga lagöverträdare har särbehandlingen i påföljdsystemet lett till att proportionalitetsprincipen har fått stå tillbaka för andra intressen.

I uppsatsens analys konstateras att det inte finns någon entydig teoretisk grund för särbehandlingen av unga myndiga i påföljdssystemet. Däremot finns det mycket i de förarbeten och doktrin som behandlas i uppsatsen som tyder på att ungdomsreduktionen av unga myndiga var förenlig med proportionalitetsprincipen. Forskning visar att hjärnans grundläggande funktioner inte är fullt utvecklade förrän omkring 25-årsåldern vilket leder till att unga myndiga i åldern 18-20 år generellt har en outvecklad ansvarsförmåga i jämförelse med äldre vuxna. Outvecklad ansvarsförmåga leder till att den unge myndigas skuld är mindre, varför denne förtjänar ett lägre straff än äldre vuxna. Straffvärdet måste därför justeras vid påföljdsbestämningen för att påföljden ska vara proportionerlig. Ovanstående resonemang framförs dels i doktrin samt i förarbetet Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga.

Fängelsestraff ses som skadligt varför det bland annat följer av humanitetsprincipen att den allmänna repressionsnivån inte får vara mer ingripande än nödvändigt. I doktrin och förarbeten anförs att det finns humana skäl för att hålla nere fängelsestraffens längd för 18-20 åringar. Detta anförs då unga myndiga tar större skada av långa fängelsestraff i jämförelse med äldre.

I slutsatsen noteras bland annat att det inte förs någon diskussion om de straffteoretiska grunderna för särbehandlingen av unga i propositionen Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet. De humanitära aspekterna som bör beaktas vid straffskärpningar, och som kan utgöra en förklaring till varför unga myndiga har särbehandlats i påföljdssystemet, nämns inte i propositionen. Med anledning av avsaknaden av saklig och rationell argumentation i propositionen dras följande slutsats i uppsatsen; den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen kan inte, utifrån argumentationen i propositionen, anses vara förenlig med principerna om proportionalitet och humanitet. Den delvis slopade ungdomsreduktionen framstår som ett resultat av godtycklig straffskärpning. (Less)
Abstract
There’s been a tradition of special treatment toward young adults in the Swedish legal sanction system. On January 2, 2022, the young adult penalty reduction was partially abolished. The basis for the partially abolished young adult reduction consisted of the report Abolished sentence reduction for young adults (Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga), which in turn formed the basis for the proposition Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime (Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet). The proposition led to the young adult reduction being partially abolished for offenders in the 18-20 age group. The partially abolished reduction implies that the court must not particularly take the defendant's... (More)
There’s been a tradition of special treatment toward young adults in the Swedish legal sanction system. On January 2, 2022, the young adult penalty reduction was partially abolished. The basis for the partially abolished young adult reduction consisted of the report Abolished sentence reduction for young adults (Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga), which in turn formed the basis for the proposition Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime (Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet). The proposition led to the young adult reduction being partially abolished for offenders in the 18-20 age group. The partially abolished reduction implies that the court must not particularly take the defendant's youth into account when sentencing serious crimes committed by someone who has turned 18.
This thesis aims to investigate whether the partially abolished young adult reduction, based on the legislator's arguments in the proposition Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime, can be considered compatible with the principles of proportionality and humanity. The Swedish penal system rests, among other things, on the principles of proportionality and humanity. A changed level of punishment should therefore be justified based on circumstances relevant to the level of punishment according to the principles of proportionality and humanity.
As an argument for partially scrapping the young adult reduction, the government argued that in the case of serious crime, applying the reduction leads to the punishment being out of proportion to the seriousness of the crime. Furthermore, the government states that regarding young offenders the special treatment in the penalty system has led to the principle of proportionality having to take a backseat to other interests. In this thesis’ analysis, it is established that there is no clear theoretical basis for the special treatment of young adults in the penal system. On the other hand, the legislative history and doctrine that is treated in this essay indicates that the youth reduction of young adults was compatible with the principle of proportionality.
Research shows that the brain's basic functions are not fully developed until around the age of 25. Young adults aged 18-20 generally have an undeveloped capacity for responsibility in comparison to older adults. Undeveloped capacity for responsibility leads to the young adult's guilt being less, which is why the young adult deserves a lower sentence than older adults. The penal value must therefore be adjusted when determining the penalty to be in proportion to the offence. The above reasoning is presented both in doctrine and in the legislative history Abolished sentence reduction for young adults.
Imprisonment is seen as harmful, which is why it follows from the principle of humanity, that the general level of repression must not be more intrusive than necessary. In doctrine and legislative history it is stated that there are humane reasons for keeping down the length of prison sentences for 18–20-year-olds. This is stated as young adults take greater damage from long prison sentences compared to older people.
In the conclusion it is noted, among other things, that there is no discussion of the penal theoretical grounds for the special treatment of young people in the proposal Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime. The humanitarian aspects, which should be considered when penalties are increased and which may constitute an explanation for why young adults have been treated differently in the penalty system, are not mentioned in the proposition. Due to the lack of factual and rational argumentation in the proposition, the following conclusion is drawn in the essay; the partially abolished young adult reduction cannot, based on the argumentation in the proposition, be considered compatible with the principles of proportionality and humanity. The partially abolished youth reduction appears to be the result of an arbitrary increase in punishment. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Linné, Johanna LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Arbitrary increased penalties? - About reduced sentence for young adults and the principles of proportionality and humanity
course
JURM02 20221
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
straffrätt, ungdomsreduktion
language
Swedish
id
9097128
date added to LUP
2022-09-19 14:17:26
date last changed
2022-09-19 14:17:26
@misc{9097128,
  abstract     = {{There’s been a tradition of special treatment toward young adults in the Swedish legal sanction system. On January 2, 2022, the young adult penalty reduction was partially abolished. The basis for the partially abolished young adult reduction consisted of the report Abolished sentence reduction for young adults (Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga), which in turn formed the basis for the proposition Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime (Slopad straffrabatt för unga myndiga vid allvarlig brottslighet). The proposition led to the young adult reduction being partially abolished for offenders in the 18-20 age group. The partially abolished reduction implies that the court must not particularly take the defendant's youth into account when sentencing serious crimes committed by someone who has turned 18.
This thesis aims to investigate whether the partially abolished young adult reduction, based on the legislator's arguments in the proposition Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime, can be considered compatible with the principles of proportionality and humanity. The Swedish penal system rests, among other things, on the principles of proportionality and humanity. A changed level of punishment should therefore be justified based on circumstances relevant to the level of punishment according to the principles of proportionality and humanity.
As an argument for partially scrapping the young adult reduction, the government argued that in the case of serious crime, applying the reduction leads to the punishment being out of proportion to the seriousness of the crime. Furthermore, the government states that regarding young offenders the special treatment in the penalty system has led to the principle of proportionality having to take a backseat to other interests. In this thesis’ analysis, it is established that there is no clear theoretical basis for the special treatment of young adults in the penal system. On the other hand, the legislative history and doctrine that is treated in this essay indicates that the youth reduction of young adults was compatible with the principle of proportionality.
Research shows that the brain's basic functions are not fully developed until around the age of 25. Young adults aged 18-20 generally have an undeveloped capacity for responsibility in comparison to older adults. Undeveloped capacity for responsibility leads to the young adult's guilt being less, which is why the young adult deserves a lower sentence than older adults. The penal value must therefore be adjusted when determining the penalty to be in proportion to the offence. The above reasoning is presented both in doctrine and in the legislative history Abolished sentence reduction for young adults.
Imprisonment is seen as harmful, which is why it follows from the principle of humanity, that the general level of repression must not be more intrusive than necessary. In doctrine and legislative history it is stated that there are humane reasons for keeping down the length of prison sentences for 18–20-year-olds. This is stated as young adults take greater damage from long prison sentences compared to older people.
In the conclusion it is noted, among other things, that there is no discussion of the penal theoretical grounds for the special treatment of young people in the proposal Abolished sentence reduction for young adults in serious crime. The humanitarian aspects, which should be considered when penalties are increased and which may constitute an explanation for why young adults have been treated differently in the penalty system, are not mentioned in the proposition. Due to the lack of factual and rational argumentation in the proposition, the following conclusion is drawn in the essay; the partially abolished young adult reduction cannot, based on the argumentation in the proposition, be considered compatible with the principles of proportionality and humanity. The partially abolished youth reduction appears to be the result of an arbitrary increase in punishment.}},
  author       = {{Linné, Johanna}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Godtycklig straffskärpning? - Om ungdomsreduktionen utifrån proportionalitet- och humanitetsprincipen.}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}