Straffrättslig jurisdiktion i folkrätten – En analys av jurisdiktionsfördelningen före och efter DCA-avtalets ikraftträdande
(2025) LAGF03 20251Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Det försämrade säkerhetspolitiska läget i Europa sedan Rysslands fullskaliga invasion av Ukraina 2022 har föranlett en omorientering av svensk försvars- och säkerhetspolitik. Inom denna kontext har Sverige både ansökt om och beviljats medlemskap i Nato samt ingått ett bilateralt försvarssamarbetsavtal med USA (DCA-avtalet).
Uppsatsen behandlar hur staters rätt att utöva jurisdiktion enligt folkrätten påverkas av internationella avtal, med särskilt fokus på det svensk-amerikanska DCA-avtalet. Syftet är att undersöka hur frågan om jurisdiktion regleras inom folkrätten och på vilket sätt DCA-avtalet förändrar Sveriges möjligheter att utöva jurisdiktion vid amerikansk militär närvaro på svenskt territorium.
Genom en rättsdogmatisk metod... (More) - Det försämrade säkerhetspolitiska läget i Europa sedan Rysslands fullskaliga invasion av Ukraina 2022 har föranlett en omorientering av svensk försvars- och säkerhetspolitik. Inom denna kontext har Sverige både ansökt om och beviljats medlemskap i Nato samt ingått ett bilateralt försvarssamarbetsavtal med USA (DCA-avtalet).
Uppsatsen behandlar hur staters rätt att utöva jurisdiktion enligt folkrätten påverkas av internationella avtal, med särskilt fokus på det svensk-amerikanska DCA-avtalet. Syftet är att undersöka hur frågan om jurisdiktion regleras inom folkrätten och på vilket sätt DCA-avtalet förändrar Sveriges möjligheter att utöva jurisdiktion vid amerikansk militär närvaro på svenskt territorium.
Genom en rättsdogmatisk metod analyseras folkrättens grundläggande reglering av jurisdiktion, där territorialitetsprincipen utgör den centrala utgångspunkten för staters domsrätt. Samtidigt står det klart att folkrätten är dispositiv inom detta område, vilket innebär att stater kan avtala om andra ordningar.
Mot denna bakgrund analyseras det rättsliga innehållet i DCA-avtalet. Det kan konstateras att avtalet innebär en förändring i förhållande till den ordning som annars hade gällt enligt folkrätten. Sverige avstår sin företrädesrätt till jurisdiktion i situationer där amerikansk militär personal är inblandad – oavsett om brott begåtts i tjänst eller utanför tjänst och oavsett om brottet riktar sig mot svenska eller amerikanska intressen. Även om Sverige enligt avtalet har möjlighet att återta jurisdiktion i vissa fall, saknas en tydlig definition av vilka situationer detta omfattar, vilket medför en viss rättslig osäkerhet i den praktiska tillämpningen. (Less) - Abstract
- The deteriorating security situation in Europe following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has prompted a reorientation of Swedish defence and security policy. In this context, Sweden has both applied for and been granted membership in NATO, and has concluded a bilateral defence cooperation agreement with the United States.
This thesis examines how states’ right to exercise jurisdiction under international law is affected by international agreements, with particular focus on the bilateral Defence Cooperation Agreement between Sweden and the United States. The purpose is to examine how the issue of jurisdiction is regulated under international law, and in what ways the Defence Cooperation Agreement alters Sweden’s ability to... (More) - The deteriorating security situation in Europe following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has prompted a reorientation of Swedish defence and security policy. In this context, Sweden has both applied for and been granted membership in NATO, and has concluded a bilateral defence cooperation agreement with the United States.
This thesis examines how states’ right to exercise jurisdiction under international law is affected by international agreements, with particular focus on the bilateral Defence Cooperation Agreement between Sweden and the United States. The purpose is to examine how the issue of jurisdiction is regulated under international law, and in what ways the Defence Cooperation Agreement alters Sweden’s ability to exercise jurisdiction in cases involving the presence of US military personnel on Swedish territory.
Using a legal doctrinal method, the thesis analyses the fundamental regulation of jurisdiction under international law, where the principle of territoriality serves as the central point of departure for state jurisdiction. At the same time, it is evident that international law is optional in this area, which means that states are free to agree upon alternative arrangements through treaty.
Against this background, the legal content of the Defence Cooperation Agreement is analysed. It is found that the agreement constitutes a departure from the jurisdictional regime that would otherwise apply under international law. Through the agreement, Sweden relinquishes its precedency to exercise jurisdiction in situations involving US military personnel – regardless of whether the offence is commited in the line of duty or not, and regardless of whether the offence is directed against Swedish or American interests. Although Sweden formally retains the right to reclaim jurisdiction in certain cases, the absence of a clear definition of such situations creates a degree of legal uncertainty in practice. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9190916
- author
- Kuisma, Nellie LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- folkrätt, public international law
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9190916
- date added to LUP
- 2025-06-23 13:07:17
- date last changed
- 2025-06-23 13:07:17
@misc{9190916, abstract = {{The deteriorating security situation in Europe following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has prompted a reorientation of Swedish defence and security policy. In this context, Sweden has both applied for and been granted membership in NATO, and has concluded a bilateral defence cooperation agreement with the United States. This thesis examines how states’ right to exercise jurisdiction under international law is affected by international agreements, with particular focus on the bilateral Defence Cooperation Agreement between Sweden and the United States. The purpose is to examine how the issue of jurisdiction is regulated under international law, and in what ways the Defence Cooperation Agreement alters Sweden’s ability to exercise jurisdiction in cases involving the presence of US military personnel on Swedish territory. Using a legal doctrinal method, the thesis analyses the fundamental regulation of jurisdiction under international law, where the principle of territoriality serves as the central point of departure for state jurisdiction. At the same time, it is evident that international law is optional in this area, which means that states are free to agree upon alternative arrangements through treaty. Against this background, the legal content of the Defence Cooperation Agreement is analysed. It is found that the agreement constitutes a departure from the jurisdictional regime that would otherwise apply under international law. Through the agreement, Sweden relinquishes its precedency to exercise jurisdiction in situations involving US military personnel – regardless of whether the offence is commited in the line of duty or not, and regardless of whether the offence is directed against Swedish or American interests. Although Sweden formally retains the right to reclaim jurisdiction in certain cases, the absence of a clear definition of such situations creates a degree of legal uncertainty in practice.}}, author = {{Kuisma, Nellie}}, language = {{swe}}, note = {{Student Paper}}, title = {{Straffrättslig jurisdiktion i folkrätten – En analys av jurisdiktionsfördelningen före och efter DCA-avtalets ikraftträdande}}, year = {{2025}}, }