Att straffa narkotikamissbrukare - Om svensk och norsk domstols motivering av narkotikamissbrukares straff
(2022) LAGF03 20222Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Sverige har de senaste åren mottagit kritik från olika håll på grund av den rådande narkotikalagstiftningen. Kritikerna menar att Sveriges är i stort behov av att utvärdera sin narkotikalagstiftning och följa i omvärldens fotspår och överse straffen för narkotikamissbrukare och möjligen rent av avkriminalisera när det gäller eget bruk. Socialminister Lena Hallengren svarar bestämt att någon utredning kring detta inte kommer att göras med hänvisning till de negativa konsekvenserna av en sådan utredning. Men konsekvenserna av hur den nuvarande narkotikalagstiftningen träffar missbrukare då? Ett land som har börjat se över sin praxis kring detta är Sveriges grannland Norge som i april 2021 kom med ny revolutionerande praxis inneburet att... (More)
- Sverige har de senaste åren mottagit kritik från olika håll på grund av den rådande narkotikalagstiftningen. Kritikerna menar att Sveriges är i stort behov av att utvärdera sin narkotikalagstiftning och följa i omvärldens fotspår och överse straffen för narkotikamissbrukare och möjligen rent av avkriminalisera när det gäller eget bruk. Socialminister Lena Hallengren svarar bestämt att någon utredning kring detta inte kommer att göras med hänvisning till de negativa konsekvenserna av en sådan utredning. Men konsekvenserna av hur den nuvarande narkotikalagstiftningen träffar missbrukare då? Ett land som har börjat se över sin praxis kring detta är Sveriges grannland Norge som i april 2021 kom med ny revolutionerande praxis inneburet att missbrukare som innehar och brukar narkotika upp till 5 gram ådöms påföljdseftergift. Detta är två väldigt skilda tillvägagångssätt och det är därför intressant att se till vad detta får för konsekvenser i praktiken.
Uppsatsen utgår helt från relativ straffteori som länge varit den dominerande teorin för att förklara motivering av straff i den moderna straffrätten. Uppsatsen tar inte ställning till om det finns någon motivering som är mer övertygande än den utan det intressanta är hur respektive land motiverar sina domar utifrån allmän- och individualpreventivt hänseende samt problematiseringen av dessa.
Vidare ställs frågan hur dessa två länder motiverar deras respektive straffbedömning i domstol när det kommer till missbrukare som brukar och innehar narkotika för eget bruk. Detta görs utifrån de tre domarna som Norges Høyesterett, Norges Högsta domstol, framlagt som ny praxis samt likställda domar från Sveriges hovrätter. Även möjligheter och problem med Norges nya praxis analyseras. Slutsatsen lyder att allmän- och individualpreventiva åtgärder många gånger är svåra att kombinera och i flera fall verkar en få ge efter för den andra. Det kan finnas flertalet problem men också möjligheter med Norges nya praxis, dock verkar Norge genomgå-ende ha ett mer individualpreventivt synsätt på hur missbruksproblematiken ska hanteras i deras narkotikalagstiftning. Sverige däremot verkar motivera sina straff mer utifrån allmänprevention där den individuella missbrukarens behov är underordnat. (Less) - Abstract
- In recent years, Sweden has received criticism from various sources because of their current drug legislation. The critics believe that Sweden needs to evaluate its drug legislation and follow in the footsteps of the rest of the world by revising the punishments for drug addicts, possibly even decriminalizing their personal use. Social Affairs Minister Lena Hallengren firmly replies that no investigation of this sort will be done with reference to the negative consequences of such an investigation. In contrast, what are the negative consequences for current addicts under the current drug legislation? One country that has begun to review its practice in this regard is Sweden's neighboring country Norway, which in April 2021 introduced new... (More)
- In recent years, Sweden has received criticism from various sources because of their current drug legislation. The critics believe that Sweden needs to evaluate its drug legislation and follow in the footsteps of the rest of the world by revising the punishments for drug addicts, possibly even decriminalizing their personal use. Social Affairs Minister Lena Hallengren firmly replies that no investigation of this sort will be done with reference to the negative consequences of such an investigation. In contrast, what are the negative consequences for current addicts under the current drug legislation? One country that has begun to review its practice in this regard is Sweden's neighboring country Norway, which in April 2021 introduced new revolutionary precedent on the topic, meaning that addicts who possess and use narcotics up to 5 grams are receiving remission of penalty. This seems to be two very different approaches on how to deal with drug abuse and therefore it is relevant to compare
The essay is based entirely on relative punishment theory, which is the dominant theory to explain the justification of punishment in modern criminal law.
Furthermore, this essay asks how these two countries justify their respective punishments in court when it comes to addicts who use and possess drugs for their own personal use. Therefore the essay does not take a position on whether there is any justification that is more convincing than the other. It rather focuses on the justification itself. This is done based on three judgments presented by the Supreme Court of Norway as new precedent as well as equivalent judgments from Sweden's courts of appeal. The essay also analyzes the opportunities and problems with Norway's new precedent. The conclusion is that general and individual preventive measures are often difficult to combine and in several cases one seems to give way to the other. There may be several problems but also opportunities with Norway's new precedent, but Norway consistently seems to have a more individual preventive approach to how the problem of addiction should be handled in their drug legislation. Sweden, on the other hand, seems to justify its punishments more based on general prevention, where the needs of the individual addict are secondary. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9104866
- author
- Iversen, Miranda LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20222
- year
- 2022
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- straffrätt, relativ straffteori, narkotikamissbruk, narkotikalagstiftning
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9104866
- date added to LUP
- 2023-02-03 16:18:21
- date last changed
- 2023-02-03 16:18:21
@misc{9104866,
abstract = {{In recent years, Sweden has received criticism from various sources because of their current drug legislation. The critics believe that Sweden needs to evaluate its drug legislation and follow in the footsteps of the rest of the world by revising the punishments for drug addicts, possibly even decriminalizing their personal use. Social Affairs Minister Lena Hallengren firmly replies that no investigation of this sort will be done with reference to the negative consequences of such an investigation. In contrast, what are the negative consequences for current addicts under the current drug legislation? One country that has begun to review its practice in this regard is Sweden's neighboring country Norway, which in April 2021 introduced new revolutionary precedent on the topic, meaning that addicts who possess and use narcotics up to 5 grams are receiving remission of penalty. This seems to be two very different approaches on how to deal with drug abuse and therefore it is relevant to compare
The essay is based entirely on relative punishment theory, which is the dominant theory to explain the justification of punishment in modern criminal law.
Furthermore, this essay asks how these two countries justify their respective punishments in court when it comes to addicts who use and possess drugs for their own personal use. Therefore the essay does not take a position on whether there is any justification that is more convincing than the other. It rather focuses on the justification itself. This is done based on three judgments presented by the Supreme Court of Norway as new precedent as well as equivalent judgments from Sweden's courts of appeal. The essay also analyzes the opportunities and problems with Norway's new precedent. The conclusion is that general and individual preventive measures are often difficult to combine and in several cases one seems to give way to the other. There may be several problems but also opportunities with Norway's new precedent, but Norway consistently seems to have a more individual preventive approach to how the problem of addiction should be handled in their drug legislation. Sweden, on the other hand, seems to justify its punishments more based on general prevention, where the needs of the individual addict are secondary.}},
author = {{Iversen, Miranda}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Att straffa narkotikamissbrukare - Om svensk och norsk domstols motivering av narkotikamissbrukares straff}},
year = {{2022}},
}