Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Vem kontrollerar kontrollanten? - En kritisk granskning av en utökning av preventiva tvångsmedel utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv

Toft, Ebba LU (2023) JURM02 20231
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Den allvarliga brottsligheten som begås av kriminella nätverk har ökat drastiskt under de senaste åren. Skjutningar och sprängningar har blivit alltmer förekommande och diskuteras frekvent i medier och politiska debatter. Hur man ska komma till rätta med problemet är en angelägen fråga. Ett av förslagen, för att ge de brottsutredande myndigheterna effektivare verktyg för att förhindra denna typ av allvarlig brottslighet, är att utöka möjligheterna till preventiva tvångsmedel. Förslaget innebär kortfattat att brottsutredande myndig-heter skulle få ökade befogenheter att använda sig av hemliga tvångsmedel utanför en förundersökning, vilket innebär att det inte behöver finnas någon konkret brottsmisstanke. I dagsläget är preventiva... (More)
Den allvarliga brottsligheten som begås av kriminella nätverk har ökat drastiskt under de senaste åren. Skjutningar och sprängningar har blivit alltmer förekommande och diskuteras frekvent i medier och politiska debatter. Hur man ska komma till rätta med problemet är en angelägen fråga. Ett av förslagen, för att ge de brottsutredande myndigheterna effektivare verktyg för att förhindra denna typ av allvarlig brottslighet, är att utöka möjligheterna till preventiva tvångsmedel. Förslaget innebär kortfattat att brottsutredande myndig-heter skulle få ökade befogenheter att använda sig av hemliga tvångsmedel utanför en förundersökning, vilket innebär att det inte behöver finnas någon konkret brottsmisstanke. I dagsläget är preventiva tvångsmedel förbehållet särskilt allvarliga brott som faller inom SÄPO:s verksamhetsområde eller är att anse som systemhotande brottslighet. En utökning innebär alltså att fler personer riskerar att övervakas samt att reglerna kommer tillämpas av fler. Med en utökning av preventiva tvångsmedel föreligger alltså ökade risker för missbruk.

Vid användandet av såväl hemliga som preventiva tvångsmedel föreligger vissa kontrollfunktioner i syfte att säkerställa rättssäkerheten och motverka missbruk inom de brottsutredande myndigheterna. Dessa kontrollfunktioner utgör så kallade rättssäkerhetsgarantier. Utan rättssäkerhetsgarantierna hade regelverket stått i strid med Europakonventionen och regeringsformen, det är alltså en förutsättning för användandet av hemliga och preventiva tvångsmedel att det existerar effektiva rättssäkerhetsgarantier. Den blotta existensen av rättssäkerhetsgarantier är dock inte att anse som tillräcklig, utan de ska även utgöra effektiva verktyg för att kontrollera och minimera riskerna för lagstridighet och missbruk.

Uppsatsen syftar till att kritiskt granska delbetänkandet Utökade möjligheter att använda preventiva tvångsmedel (SOU 2022:52) med utgångspunkt i rättssäkerhetsgarantierna i form av kontrollfunktioner. Uppsatsen granskar huruvida en utökning av preventiva tvångsmedel är att anse som rättssäker utifrån ett kritiskt rättssäkerhetsperspektiv. Detta görs utifrån en rättsanalytisk metod och rättspolitisk argumentation.

Slutsatsen av uppsatsen mynnar ut i att, de av utredningen föreslagna, rättssäkerhetsgarantierna inte är att anse som tillräckliga, utan att ytterligare övervä-ganden bör göras. Det konstateras även att ett system med preventiva tvångs-medel, för denna typ av brottslighet, går att anse som rättsosäker oberoende rättssäkerhetsgarantierna. Innan en utökning av preventiva tvångsmedel bör det göras noggranna överväganden huruvida det är nödvändigt i ett demokratiskt samhälle och vad för typ av samhälle vi riskerar att skapa med successiva ökningar av statens maktbefogenheter gentemot enskilda. (Less)
Abstract
Serious crimes committed by criminal networks have increased over the last couple of years. Shootings and explosions have become more common and are frequently discussed in media and political debates. How to solve this problem is an important question and a proposal that has been suggested, with the purpose to give criminal investigation authorities more effective tools to prevent these serious crimes, is to give criminal investigation authorities ex-tended powers to use preventive coercive measures. In short, the proposal means that the criminal investigation authorities would be given extended powers to use secret coercive measures outside of a preliminary investigation, which means that no concrete criminal suspicion is needed. At this... (More)
Serious crimes committed by criminal networks have increased over the last couple of years. Shootings and explosions have become more common and are frequently discussed in media and political debates. How to solve this problem is an important question and a proposal that has been suggested, with the purpose to give criminal investigation authorities more effective tools to prevent these serious crimes, is to give criminal investigation authorities ex-tended powers to use preventive coercive measures. In short, the proposal means that the criminal investigation authorities would be given extended powers to use secret coercive measures outside of a preliminary investigation, which means that no concrete criminal suspicion is needed. At this moment preventive coercive measures are reserved to specific serious crimes within the area for Swedish security service or crimes that are to be seen as system threatening. An extension of preventive coercive measures implicates that more people are at risk of being under state surveillance and, also that more authorities will apply the rules. Therefore, the risk of abuse increases with an extension.

When using preventive coercive measures, as well as secret coercive measures, there are controlling functions to ensure the rule of law, and to pre-vent abuse within the criminal investigation authorities. These controlling functions are so called procedural safeguards. Without these procedural safe-guards the regulation would be in conflict with the European Convention on Human rights and the Instrument of government. Therefore, it is necessary to have these effective procedural safeguards to have a system with secret and preventive coercive measures. The mere existence of these procedural safe-guards is though not enough, they must also be effective tools to control and minimize the risk of abuse and unlawfulness.

This thesis has the purpose to critically examine the proposal of Extended possibilities to use preventive coercive measures (Swedish Government Offi-cial Reports 2022:52) based on the procedural safeguards in form of control-ling functions. The thesis examines how an expansion of preventive coercive measures are to be seen as legally secure from a legal certainty perspective. This will be done using a legal analytical method and legal policy argumenta-tion.

The thesis concludes that the procedural safeguards, suggested in the pro-posal, are not to be seen as sufficient, and that further considerations should be given. It also appoints that a system with preventive coercive measures, for the suggested types of crimes, can be seen as not legally secure irrespective of the procedural safeguards. Before extending the possibilities to use preventive coercive measures there should be taken careful considerations whether this is necessary in a democratic society and what kind of society is at risk of being created with extending the state’s powers against individuals. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Toft, Ebba LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Who controls the controller? - A critical review of an extension of preventive coercive measures from a legal certainty perspective
course
JURM02 20231
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
straffrätt, hemliga tvångsmedel, preventiva tvångsmedel, rättssäkerhet
language
Swedish
id
9114835
date added to LUP
2023-06-08 10:58:59
date last changed
2023-06-08 10:58:59
@misc{9114835,
  abstract     = {{Serious crimes committed by criminal networks have increased over the last couple of years. Shootings and explosions have become more common and are frequently discussed in media and political debates. How to solve this problem is an important question and a proposal that has been suggested, with the purpose to give criminal investigation authorities more effective tools to prevent these serious crimes, is to give criminal investigation authorities ex-tended powers to use preventive coercive measures. In short, the proposal means that the criminal investigation authorities would be given extended powers to use secret coercive measures outside of a preliminary investigation, which means that no concrete criminal suspicion is needed. At this moment preventive coercive measures are reserved to specific serious crimes within the area for Swedish security service or crimes that are to be seen as system threatening. An extension of preventive coercive measures implicates that more people are at risk of being under state surveillance and, also that more authorities will apply the rules. Therefore, the risk of abuse increases with an extension. 

When using preventive coercive measures, as well as secret coercive measures, there are controlling functions to ensure the rule of law, and to pre-vent abuse within the criminal investigation authorities. These controlling functions are so called procedural safeguards. Without these procedural safe-guards the regulation would be in conflict with the European Convention on Human rights and the Instrument of government. Therefore, it is necessary to have these effective procedural safeguards to have a system with secret and preventive coercive measures. The mere existence of these procedural safe-guards is though not enough, they must also be effective tools to control and minimize the risk of abuse and unlawfulness. 

This thesis has the purpose to critically examine the proposal of Extended possibilities to use preventive coercive measures (Swedish Government Offi-cial Reports 2022:52) based on the procedural safeguards in form of control-ling functions. The thesis examines how an expansion of preventive coercive measures are to be seen as legally secure from a legal certainty perspective. This will be done using a legal analytical method and legal policy argumenta-tion. 

The thesis concludes that the procedural safeguards, suggested in the pro-posal, are not to be seen as sufficient, and that further considerations should be given. It also appoints that a system with preventive coercive measures, for the suggested types of crimes, can be seen as not legally secure irrespective of the procedural safeguards. Before extending the possibilities to use preventive coercive measures there should be taken careful considerations whether this is necessary in a democratic society and what kind of society is at risk of being created with extending the state’s powers against individuals.}},
  author       = {{Toft, Ebba}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Vem kontrollerar kontrollanten? - En kritisk granskning av en utökning av preventiva tvångsmedel utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}