Brott men aldrig påföljd – En kritisk granskning av 2023 års lagändring kring bevistalan gentemot barnkonventionen
(2024) LAGF03 20241Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Genom en bevistalan enligt 38 § LUL kan allmän domstol pröva huruvida ett barn under 15 år begått ett brott. Eftersom talan rör ett barn under straffbarhetsåldern kan domen inte innehålla någon påföljd. En ny lagändring som trädde i kraft 1 juli 2023 har utvidgat möjligheten till en bevistalan och syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka hur lagändringen och författningsarbetet som föregick densamma förhåller sig till barnkonventionen.
I uppsatsen används den rättsdogmatiska metoden för att kartlägga gällande rätt. Metoden innebär att rättskällor som åtnjuter auktoritet tolkas. Detta inkluderar lagstiftning, prejudikat, förarbeten och juridisk litteratur. Vidare är uppsatsens perspektiv kritiskt rättsdogmatiskt då framställningen,... (More) - Genom en bevistalan enligt 38 § LUL kan allmän domstol pröva huruvida ett barn under 15 år begått ett brott. Eftersom talan rör ett barn under straffbarhetsåldern kan domen inte innehålla någon påföljd. En ny lagändring som trädde i kraft 1 juli 2023 har utvidgat möjligheten till en bevistalan och syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka hur lagändringen och författningsarbetet som föregick densamma förhåller sig till barnkonventionen.
I uppsatsen används den rättsdogmatiska metoden för att kartlägga gällande rätt. Metoden innebär att rättskällor som åtnjuter auktoritet tolkas. Detta inkluderar lagstiftning, prejudikat, förarbeten och juridisk litteratur. Vidare är uppsatsens perspektiv kritiskt rättsdogmatiskt då framställningen, utöver att tolka gällande rätt, även inkluderar en kritisk granskning av densamma. Barnkonventionen utgör den valda måttstocken för granskningen.
Uppsatsen redogör för att 38 § LUL numera är uppbyggd efter en presumtion att åklagaren ska väcka en bevistalan i vissa fall. Det har införts en självständig initiativrätt för åklagaren samtidigt som vårdnadshavares möjlighet att göra en framställan om bevistalan tagits bort. Slutsatsen dras att det föreligger en risk för att barnets rätt att begära prövning av skuldfrågan vid förhandling enligt barnkonventionen inte uppfylls eftersom vårdnadshavares möjlighet att göra en framställan om bevistalan tagits bort.
Barnkonventionen har sedan den 1 januari 2020 haft ställning som svensk lag och i den uttrycks principen om barnets bästa. Barnets bästa är emellertid ett komplext begrepp och bedömningen av dess innebörd måste anpassas till det specifika sammanhanget. I uppsatsen dras slutsatsen att lagändringen av 38 § LUL är förenlig med principen om barnets bästa enligt barnkonventionen.
Vidare redogör uppsatsen ingående för lagstiftningsarbetet bakom lagändringen, de synpunkter som remissinstanserna framfört och lagstiftande organs skyldigheter vid författningsarbete enligt barnkonventionen. Avslutningsvis kan slutsatsen dras att författningsarbetet skett i enlighet med barnkonventionen. (Less) - Abstract
- Through evidentiary proceedings according to 38 § LUL, the general court can examine whether a child under the age of 15 years has committed a crime. Since the action concerns a child under the age of criminal responsibility, the judgment cannot contain any criminal sanction. A new legislative amendment which entered into force on July 1, 2023, has expanded the possibility of evidentiary proceedings, and the purpose of this essay is to examine how the legislative amendment and how the legislative work that preceded it relate to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In this paper, the legal dogmatic method is used to depict the applicable law. The method implies that legal sources that enjoy authority are interpreted. This includes... (More) - Through evidentiary proceedings according to 38 § LUL, the general court can examine whether a child under the age of 15 years has committed a crime. Since the action concerns a child under the age of criminal responsibility, the judgment cannot contain any criminal sanction. A new legislative amendment which entered into force on July 1, 2023, has expanded the possibility of evidentiary proceedings, and the purpose of this essay is to examine how the legislative amendment and how the legislative work that preceded it relate to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In this paper, the legal dogmatic method is used to depict the applicable law. The method implies that legal sources that enjoy authority are interpreted. This includes statutory law, precedents, preparatory works and legal doctrine. Furthermore, the essay’s perspective is critically legal dogmatic as the representation, in addition to interpreting applicable law, also includes a critical examination of it. The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the chosen assessment basis for the review.
The essay explains that 38 § LUL is now structured according to a presumption that the prosecutor must bring evidentiary proceedings before a court under certain circumstances. The independent right for the prosecutor to take initiative to evidentiary proceedings has been introduced at the same time as the guardian’s opportunity to make a statement for evidentiary proceedings has been removed. The conclusion is drawn that there is a risk that the child’s right to request an examination of the question of guilt at a hearing according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child is not fulfilled because the guardian’s opportunity to make a statement for evidentiary proceedings has been removed.
Since January 1, 2020, the Convention on the Rights of the Child has had status as Swedish law, and it expresses the principle of the best interests of the child. However, the best interests of the child is a complex concept and the assessment of its meaning must be adapted to the specific context. The essay concludes that the amendment to 38 § LUL is compatible with the principle of the best interests of the child according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Furthermore, the essay gives a detailed account of the legislative work behind the legislative amendment, the consultation comments and the obligations of legislative bodies according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Finally, the conclusion can be drawn that the legislative work took place in accordance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9153403
- author
- Olsson, Ella LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20241
- year
- 2024
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- straffrätt, processrätt, bevistalan, barnkonventionen
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9153403
- date added to LUP
- 2024-06-26 12:10:58
- date last changed
- 2024-06-26 12:10:58
@misc{9153403,
abstract = {{Through evidentiary proceedings according to 38 § LUL, the general court can examine whether a child under the age of 15 years has committed a crime. Since the action concerns a child under the age of criminal responsibility, the judgment cannot contain any criminal sanction. A new legislative amendment which entered into force on July 1, 2023, has expanded the possibility of evidentiary proceedings, and the purpose of this essay is to examine how the legislative amendment and how the legislative work that preceded it relate to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In this paper, the legal dogmatic method is used to depict the applicable law. The method implies that legal sources that enjoy authority are interpreted. This includes statutory law, precedents, preparatory works and legal doctrine. Furthermore, the essay’s perspective is critically legal dogmatic as the representation, in addition to interpreting applicable law, also includes a critical examination of it. The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the chosen assessment basis for the review.
The essay explains that 38 § LUL is now structured according to a presumption that the prosecutor must bring evidentiary proceedings before a court under certain circumstances. The independent right for the prosecutor to take initiative to evidentiary proceedings has been introduced at the same time as the guardian’s opportunity to make a statement for evidentiary proceedings has been removed. The conclusion is drawn that there is a risk that the child’s right to request an examination of the question of guilt at a hearing according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child is not fulfilled because the guardian’s opportunity to make a statement for evidentiary proceedings has been removed.
Since January 1, 2020, the Convention on the Rights of the Child has had status as Swedish law, and it expresses the principle of the best interests of the child. However, the best interests of the child is a complex concept and the assessment of its meaning must be adapted to the specific context. The essay concludes that the amendment to 38 § LUL is compatible with the principle of the best interests of the child according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Furthermore, the essay gives a detailed account of the legislative work behind the legislative amendment, the consultation comments and the obligations of legislative bodies according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Finally, the conclusion can be drawn that the legislative work took place in accordance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child.}},
author = {{Olsson, Ella}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Brott men aldrig påföljd – En kritisk granskning av 2023 års lagändring kring bevistalan gentemot barnkonventionen}},
year = {{2024}},
}