The primary aim of this paper is to broaden the perspective on third party rights of appeal in Swedish municipal planning and to study the underlying ideals that have formed the legislation in the Planning and Building Act. Currently the legislation is undergoing several changes and with the present housing crises in several Swedish cities the pressure to streamline the process is hard. Third party rights of appeals are viewed upon as time consuming obstacles, which both hinders the expansion in housing and economic growth. Several propositions on how to improve the legislation have been evaluated over the years, the most important proposal being the removal of the county administration board as the first of three instances for planning appeals. The research questions seeks to address the overall aim by using a genealogical lens to study the history of the right to appeal municipal development plans, and compare this to the parallel debate on the subject as well as the contemporary discussion. The bulk of material has been gathered through interviews with experts connected to the subject, and the study of official governmental investigations as well as newspaper articles. The theoretical part about planning ideals draws heavily on the work of Geriant Ellis on Ireland and his critics of the economic interests that form the debate there. The conclusions gathered from the study paints an image that differs from the one presented in the media of increasing problems with the Swedish appealing system. Instead it questions the proposed changes and their possible effect on the principals on legal security, citizen participation and democracy in the planning process. The percentage of appeald plans has been relatively consistent throughout the years since around the millenium, regardless of political majority, changes in legislation or economic fluctuations. The most noticable change, but surprisingly the least discussed; is the shift from appeals belonging to the political sphere of representative democracy, to the judicial sphere. This change has not been followed by any ideological discussions, and seemingly came out of necessity due to bureaucracy and the European convention. This change however, has not been communicated to the public; leading to that credence to the system as such has been left deminished. Swedish planning is at its core a political and value loaded issue, therefore making it a question of right or wrong by changing the system of appeal to a question of pure judicial nature should have raised a bigger ideological discussion. Especially before changing the system again towards being even more law oriented