Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Brinnande ord och yttrandefrihetens gränser - En undersökning av koranbränningarnas rättsliga ställning i svensk rätt

Holmberg, Sebastian LU (2023) LAGF03 20232
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The second chapter, section 1 of the instrument of Government does not pro-vide a clear interpretation of what constitutes legitimate restrictions on free-dom of expression. This causes issues concerning the interpretation of free-dom of expression in Swedish law. The vague legal text, along with varying practices in relation to the provision, result in uncertainty regarding the extent of the freedom at hand. The issue becomes particularly apparent when deter-mining the impact of legitimate restrictions, such as the provision in the Penal code chapter 16, section 8. The regulation of freedom of expression found in the instrument of Government is complemented by the European convention on human rights. The Supreme Court has expressed... (More)
The second chapter, section 1 of the instrument of Government does not pro-vide a clear interpretation of what constitutes legitimate restrictions on free-dom of expression. This causes issues concerning the interpretation of free-dom of expression in Swedish law. The vague legal text, along with varying practices in relation to the provision, result in uncertainty regarding the extent of the freedom at hand. The issue becomes particularly apparent when deter-mining the impact of legitimate restrictions, such as the provision in the Penal code chapter 16, section 8. The regulation of freedom of expression found in the instrument of Government is complemented by the European convention on human rights. The Supreme Court has expressed varying interpretations of the legal framework; however, it has stated clearly that the interpretation of any given action should always be based on the context at hand. Thus, the decisive factor when determining whether a given act constitutes a legitimate restriction on freedom of expression are the circumstances surrounding the act. However, it is not evident which situations unequivocally indicate legiti-mate restrictions, which in turn causes issues regarding predictability. The determination of whether an act constitutes a legitimate restriction is also heav-ily impacted by the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, especial-ly its use of article 10.
The problem of an unclear legal situation is reflected in the fact that new phe-nomena, such as Quran burnings, cannot be clearly categorized as legal or illegal. So far, there is only one court ruling that illustrates the level required for an action to be considered punishable. The main issue is in the interpreta-tion of the requirement regarding contempt against Muslims, and whether that regularly should be considered fulfilled when a Quran is burned in a public place. Another issue is distinguishing the act from other legal actions, such as burning the Quran to express disproval of Islam as a religion. Currently, it cannot be conclusively stated that burning the Quran constitutes incitement to contempt against Muslims. However, considering the regulation of freedom of speech in the instrument of Government and the ECHR, it appears that such an assessment may not necessarily be sufficiently supported. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Regeringsformen (RF) 2 kap. 1 § ger inte tydlig ledning i fråga om vad som utgör legitima inskränkningar av yttrandefriheten. Lagtextens vaga utform-ning, samt skiftande praxis i förhållande till bestämmelsen gör det komplicerat att bestämma yttrandefrihetens omfattning i svensk rätt. Problematiken gör sig gällande i fråga om förhållandet till legitima inskränkningar, såsom bestäm-melsen om hets mot folkgrupp i brottsbalken (BrB) 16 kap. 8 §, men även i förhållande till Europeiska konventionen om skydd för de mänskliga rättighet-erna och grundläggande friheterna (EKMR). Konventionen har tillmätts avgö-rande betydelse av domstolarna, men tillämpningen av artiklarna är inte kon-sekvent. Detta illustreras genom Högsta domstolens skiftande... (More)
Regeringsformen (RF) 2 kap. 1 § ger inte tydlig ledning i fråga om vad som utgör legitima inskränkningar av yttrandefriheten. Lagtextens vaga utform-ning, samt skiftande praxis i förhållande till bestämmelsen gör det komplicerat att bestämma yttrandefrihetens omfattning i svensk rätt. Problematiken gör sig gällande i fråga om förhållandet till legitima inskränkningar, såsom bestäm-melsen om hets mot folkgrupp i brottsbalken (BrB) 16 kap. 8 §, men även i förhållande till Europeiska konventionen om skydd för de mänskliga rättighet-erna och grundläggande friheterna (EKMR). Konventionen har tillmätts avgö-rande betydelse av domstolarna, men tillämpningen av artiklarna är inte kon-sekvent. Detta illustreras genom Högsta domstolens skiftande tolkning av missaktningsrekvisitet i NJA 2005 s. 805 och NJA 2006 s. 467. Sammanta-get får rådande rättsläge betraktas som oklart. Till följd av vag lagstiftning är rättsutvecklingen delegerad till domstolarna vilka genom skönsmässiga be-dömningar får göra intresseavvägningar i varje givet fall. Detta förorsakar förutsebarhetsproblem, vilket är problematiskt då regelverket berör straffbara handlingar.
Problematiken med det oklara rättsläget reflekteras även i att nya fenomen, såsom koranbränningarna, inte tydligt kan kategoriseras av den svenska rätts-ordningen. Hittills ställs ett krav på ytterligare ageranden, utöver själva brän-nandet, för straffbarhet. Denna ståndpunkt har också stöd i litteraturen. Kom-plexiteten ligger främst i tolkningen av missaktningsrekvisitet och huruvida detta regelmässigt bör anses uppfyllt då en koran bränns på en offentlig plats. Även gränsdragningsproblematiken mot andra lagliga handlingar, såsom att bränna koranen för att visa misstycke mot islam som religion, försvårar den rättsliga bedömningen av agerandet. I nuläget kan man således inte fastslå att det utgör hets mot folkgrupp att bränna koranen. Mot bakgrund av yttrande-friheten i RF och EKMR framstår det dock som att en sådan bedömning inte nödvändigtvis har tillräckligt stöd ur yttrandefrihetssynpunkt. I synnerhet Europadomstolens tillämpning av artikel 17 EKMR talar för en nödvändig förändring av synen på koranbränningarna i svensk rätt. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Holmberg, Sebastian LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20232
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Statsrätt, Straffrätt
language
Swedish
id
9143332
date added to LUP
2024-02-02 12:12:32
date last changed
2024-02-02 12:12:32
@misc{9143332,
  abstract     = {{The second chapter, section 1 of the instrument of Government does not pro-vide a clear interpretation of what constitutes legitimate restrictions on free-dom of expression. This causes issues concerning the interpretation of free-dom of expression in Swedish law. The vague legal text, along with varying practices in relation to the provision, result in uncertainty regarding the extent of the freedom at hand. The issue becomes particularly apparent when deter-mining the impact of legitimate restrictions, such as the provision in the Penal code chapter 16, section 8. The regulation of freedom of expression found in the instrument of Government is complemented by the European convention on human rights. The Supreme Court has expressed varying interpretations of the legal framework; however, it has stated clearly that the interpretation of any given action should always be based on the context at hand. Thus, the decisive factor when determining whether a given act constitutes a legitimate restriction on freedom of expression are the circumstances surrounding the act. However, it is not evident which situations unequivocally indicate legiti-mate restrictions, which in turn causes issues regarding predictability. The determination of whether an act constitutes a legitimate restriction is also heav-ily impacted by the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, especial-ly its use of article 10.
The problem of an unclear legal situation is reflected in the fact that new phe-nomena, such as Quran burnings, cannot be clearly categorized as legal or illegal. So far, there is only one court ruling that illustrates the level required for an action to be considered punishable. The main issue is in the interpreta-tion of the requirement regarding contempt against Muslims, and whether that regularly should be considered fulfilled when a Quran is burned in a public place. Another issue is distinguishing the act from other legal actions, such as burning the Quran to express disproval of Islam as a religion. Currently, it cannot be conclusively stated that burning the Quran constitutes incitement to contempt against Muslims. However, considering the regulation of freedom of speech in the instrument of Government and the ECHR, it appears that such an assessment may not necessarily be sufficiently supported.}},
  author       = {{Holmberg, Sebastian}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Brinnande ord och yttrandefrihetens gränser - En undersökning av koranbränningarnas rättsliga ställning i svensk rätt}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}