Remisskrav och lagprövning – En balansgång mellan folksuveränitet och domstolsmakt
(2022) LAGF03 20222Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- The demand that proposed laws are to be referred to authorities and civil
organizations before they are presented to the parliament (the “referral
demand”) forms a central part of the Swedish legislation process and has been
stipulated in the Instruction of Government (IG) since 1809. One purpose of
this procedure is that all possible consequences of a law are to be known
before the law is voted. In this way, the legislator can refrain from passing
laws that are not in line with the constitution. The referral demand works as
a pillar for the principle of popular sovereignty as it facilitates for the
parliament to pass laws in accordance with the constitution and the legal order
in general. The referral procedure also... (More) - The demand that proposed laws are to be referred to authorities and civil
organizations before they are presented to the parliament (the “referral
demand”) forms a central part of the Swedish legislation process and has been
stipulated in the Instruction of Government (IG) since 1809. One purpose of
this procedure is that all possible consequences of a law are to be known
before the law is voted. In this way, the legislator can refrain from passing
laws that are not in line with the constitution. The referral demand works as
a pillar for the principle of popular sovereignty as it facilitates for the
parliament to pass laws in accordance with the constitution and the legal order
in general. The referral procedure also guarantees the rule of law as is makes
sure that passed law do not have unattended of unwanted consequences for
individuals.
Judicial review of laws by courts and authorities is a more recent phenomenon
in the Swedish legal order. The system where courts may refrain from the
application of a law because it is not in line with constitutional norms has
been motivated as a means to guarantee the judicial application of
constitutional rights. Such situations may appear although the Swedish
legislation process includes a referral demand and is the reason why judicial
review of laws by courts and authorities is stipulated in the IG.
This essay examines the question of how the referral demand relates to the
constitutional control of laws and more specifically in which cases courts or
authorities are to refrain from the application of a law because the referral
demand was not respected before the law was passed by the parliament. The
essay analyses the historical backgrounds, purposes and content of the referral
demand and the constitutional control of laws with the purpose of answering
the question of when constitutional control of laws relating to the referral
demand may be accurate. In short terms, the conclusion is that this may
happen when a failure to conduct the normal procedures of the referral
demand has affected the structure of the law in ways that have serious
implications for individuals. The essay is summed up by a short analysis of a
recent case in the Swedish supreme administrative court concerning
constitutional control of controversial environmental legislation that was
passed in 2021. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Kravet på att regeringen ska skicka lagförslag på remiss till myndigheter och
andra remissinstanser innan förslaget presenteras för riksdagen utgör en
central del av den svenska lagstiftningsprocessen och har stadgats i RF sedan
1809. En tanke med remissförfarandet är att lagstiftningens konsekvenser ska
bli kända på förhand och att lagstiftaren därmed kan avstå från att stifta lagar
som står i strid med överordnade normer. Remisskravet kan på detta vis ses
som en stöttepelare för folksuveräniteten eftersom det möjliggör för
riksdagen att stifta lagar som passar in i den övriga rättsordningen vilket leder
till att lagarna kan tillämpas så som lagstiftaren avsett. Remisskravet utgör
även en slags rättssäkerhetsgaranti... (More) - Kravet på att regeringen ska skicka lagförslag på remiss till myndigheter och
andra remissinstanser innan förslaget presenteras för riksdagen utgör en
central del av den svenska lagstiftningsprocessen och har stadgats i RF sedan
1809. En tanke med remissförfarandet är att lagstiftningens konsekvenser ska
bli kända på förhand och att lagstiftaren därmed kan avstå från att stifta lagar
som står i strid med överordnade normer. Remisskravet kan på detta vis ses
som en stöttepelare för folksuveräniteten eftersom det möjliggör för
riksdagen att stifta lagar som passar in i den övriga rättsordningen vilket leder
till att lagarna kan tillämpas så som lagstiftaren avsett. Remisskravet utgör
även en slags rättssäkerhetsgaranti eftersom det bidrar till att stiftade lagar
inte ger upphov till oanade konsekvenser för enskilda.
Lagprövning vid domstolar och myndigheter är en nyare företeelse inom
svensk rätt. Att lagar kan åsidosättas vid rättstillämpningen på grund av att de
strider mot någon överstående norm har främst motiverats utifrån att
rättighetsstadganden måste garanteras genomslag i rättstillämpningen för de
fall då lagstiftning trots gedigen lagberedning strider mot överstående normer.
Av denna anledning är lagprövningsrätten idag lagfäst i RF och innebär att
domstolar och myndigheter ska åsidosätta lagar som inte överensstämmer
med grundlagen.
Den här uppsatsen utreder frågan om i vilka fall lagprövning kan bli aktuellt
i förhållande till remisskravet i RF. Remisskravet och lagprövningen kan ses
som två parallella system för att garantera rättstillämpningens enlighet med
grundlagen, och det är inte självklart hur dessa system förhåller sig till
varandra. Uppsatsen reder ut såväl remisskravets som lagprövningens
historiska bakgrund, syften och innehåll i syfte att utreda i vilka situationer
en lag ska åsidosättas vid lagprövning på grund av brister i remissförfarandet
vid lagberedningen. Slutsatsen är i korta drag att detta kan bli aktuellt då ett
bristande remissförfarande påverkat lagens utformning och får implikationer
för enskildas rättssäkerhet. Uppsatsen avslutas med en kommentar rörande
HFD:s dom rörande lagprövning utifrån remisskravet angående den så
kallade Cementalagen. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9104691
- author
- Lundqvist, Klara LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20222
- year
- 2022
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- statsrätt, lagprövning, remisskrav, remissförfarande
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9104691
- date added to LUP
- 2023-02-03 16:28:37
- date last changed
- 2023-02-03 16:28:37
@misc{9104691, abstract = {{The demand that proposed laws are to be referred to authorities and civil organizations before they are presented to the parliament (the “referral demand”) forms a central part of the Swedish legislation process and has been stipulated in the Instruction of Government (IG) since 1809. One purpose of this procedure is that all possible consequences of a law are to be known before the law is voted. In this way, the legislator can refrain from passing laws that are not in line with the constitution. The referral demand works as a pillar for the principle of popular sovereignty as it facilitates for the parliament to pass laws in accordance with the constitution and the legal order in general. The referral procedure also guarantees the rule of law as is makes sure that passed law do not have unattended of unwanted consequences for individuals. Judicial review of laws by courts and authorities is a more recent phenomenon in the Swedish legal order. The system where courts may refrain from the application of a law because it is not in line with constitutional norms has been motivated as a means to guarantee the judicial application of constitutional rights. Such situations may appear although the Swedish legislation process includes a referral demand and is the reason why judicial review of laws by courts and authorities is stipulated in the IG. This essay examines the question of how the referral demand relates to the constitutional control of laws and more specifically in which cases courts or authorities are to refrain from the application of a law because the referral demand was not respected before the law was passed by the parliament. The essay analyses the historical backgrounds, purposes and content of the referral demand and the constitutional control of laws with the purpose of answering the question of when constitutional control of laws relating to the referral demand may be accurate. In short terms, the conclusion is that this may happen when a failure to conduct the normal procedures of the referral demand has affected the structure of the law in ways that have serious implications for individuals. The essay is summed up by a short analysis of a recent case in the Swedish supreme administrative court concerning constitutional control of controversial environmental legislation that was passed in 2021.}}, author = {{Lundqvist, Klara}}, language = {{swe}}, note = {{Student Paper}}, title = {{Remisskrav och lagprövning – En balansgång mellan folksuveränitet och domstolsmakt}}, year = {{2022}}, }