In 2015, the European Union (EU) was facing the largest migration crisis in modern history. In light of the high reception of asylum seekers in Sweden during the autumn of the same year, a temporary law (2016:752) was adopted which restricted the possibilities of obtaining a permanentresidence permit and of family reunification. The law has received criticism for being contrary to Swedish convention commitments, especially the right to respect for family life and the prohibition of discrimination according to Articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the Convention). Against the backdrop of this criticism, this thesis aims to examine whether the so-called Bosphorus presumption, also known as the presumption of equivalent protection, could be applicable in a hypothetic case where Sweden is brought before the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) for violating the Convention as a result of the temporary law. The criteria for the application of the presumption are firstly that the intrusive measure, here the restriction of the right to family reunification, can be said to fall within the scope of the strict international legal obligations of the state, meaning that the state can be said to have exercised a certain amount of discretion and to have enjoyed a certain margin of manoeuvre. The conclusion of this thesis is that likely would be considered to have exercised discretion as well as enjoyed a margin of manoeuvre when restricting the right to family reunification by adopting the temporary law. This conclusion is mainly based on the fact that the international legal obligations in this case flow from directives, which are binding on member states only as to the result to be achieved, and leave the choice of form and methods to the authorities of the member state. Furthermore, the directives which the temporary law is based on are so-called minimum directives, which allow for the member states to provide a higher level of protection.

In this thesis, I scrutinise and interpret Jürgen Habermas’s claim that justification of moral norms necessitates cognitivism. I do this by analysing the general idea behind his discourse theory of morality and then his metaethics. From there, I examine the non-cognitivist theory called prescriptivism as set out by Richard Hare to see if his account of moral reasoning is able to counter Habermas’s claims and thereafter, I examine some criticism against his concept of communicative action. I also engage with the discussion on how to define cognitivism: that is, whether the line should be drawn between moral realism on the cognitivist side, and constructivism on the other, or if cognitivism can include constructivist theories too. I propose that it should, provided that it allows moral statements to be truth-apt and express a mental state like that of belief. Following this definition, I argue that Habermas can be labelled a cognitivist and finally, I conclude that Habermas's argument does not hold under scrutiny.

Studien behandlar ämnet fri programvara utifrån ett diskursanalytiskt perspektiv. Texter och tal av Richard M. Stallman, grundaren av Free Software Foundation (FSF), ligger i fokus för studien. FSF är en rörelse som har i syfte att göra och kämpa för fri programvara. Detta innebär uttryckligen en kritik mot programvara som är ofri eller proprietär. Studien visar på tre olika diskurser som är betydelsefulla för fri programvara; frihetsdiskursen, maktdiskursen och etikdiskursen. Det förs även en mer teoretisk kopplad diskussion där texternas relateras till teorier om hackeretik, frihet och mänskliga rättigheter.

Abstract As human beings, we are all governed by our innate instinct that to kill another human being, or to just inflict pain on another, is to go against what makes us human. Still, it happens every day, far and near. Some of these killings happens in war-like situations, where atrocities against humanity occur. The international community has since the founding of UN in 1945, a duty to intervene where crimes against the human rights occur. This is a difficult task, because, in order to intervene and help those in need, the situation might postulate states violating states sovereignty. This is a problem.                        Hence, the main aim of this study is to investigate how a state can justify intervening in a foreign country in the light of human rights and state sovereignty.                       In order to do this, the theories of sovereignty, nature rights, human rights and intervention has been applied upon the empirical material of USA’s invasion of Iraq, also named, Operation Iraqi Freedom. To execute the analysis, an idea centered analytical method was used. The two questions that guided this study lies both on an theoretical and empirical level. The previous question looked into how states can defend their actions when intervening on basis of the human rights, in a foreign state. The latter question investigates USA’s reasoning and justification, in regards to sovereignty and human rights, prior to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.                       The study showed that the human rights, as well as liberal values, such as, freedom and liberty were the prevailing arguments in America’s reasoning.                       The international community’s agreement on international law and respecting the principle of self governance, has, in recent years, put a clear tension on the relation between sovereignty and humanitarian intervention.                       This goes to show that in questions of sovereignty vs. human rights, the latter comes out on top in international law. At least in the case of USA’s invasion of Iraq in 2003.                       Though, the question on who has the right and when it is right to intervene is very much circumstantial, and so, the discussion ought to continue.   Keywords: sovereignty, nature rights, human rights, intervention, Iraq, USA, Operation Iraqi Freedom, White House

Human rights and solidarity, as well as moral and legal responsibilities to protect people in need of refuge, seem to be principles of secondary importance within international migratory policies today. Instead, the predominant view seems to focus more and more on the protection of territorial borders, the welfare state and national identity. This international change in discourse can also be seen in the political trends of individual states. There are reasons to believe that this is a development that is also perceptible in the political rhetoric that is used in parliamentary debates, which constitute the main focus of this thesis. The aim of this study has therefore been to increase the understanding of this change in migratory policies by analyzing Swedish parliamentary debates between 1975 and 2002, using a theoretical framework focused on two different perspectives on security: First, the Copenhagen School and securitization of migration, and second, human security and human rights. The method consists of an interpretative and reflective method, together with a critical discourse analysis approach. The main results of the thesis show a possibility to distinguish four sets of discourses with close ties to the contemporary societal context during this period of almost three decades. However, the main arguments for such a change in discourse are first, that although the migration policies have developed in a more restrictive way since the 1980’s, the arguments and rhetoric in parliamentary debates have not changed much even though the tendencies are harder tones simultaneously with such restrictions. Second, in spite of this similarity, there have been people in parliament who have raised their voices and protested during this period when, in their view, the politics has moved outside of the ordinary framework. Finally, this thesis argues that it is possible to place the two debating sides in what could be named the security/rights- nexus, depending on each side’s point of departure according to the security framework of this thesis.

Denna undersökningen ämnar besvara hur gymnasielärare i samhällskunskap implementerar kunskapskravet om de mänskliga rättigheterna, som alla elever ska ha kunskap om efter avslutade kurser i samhällskunskap. Undersökningen grundar sig i kvalitativa intervjuer, där fem lärare besvarar frågor kring i vilken utsträckning de implementerar kunskapskravet och vilken relation de har till olika perspektiv på mänskliga rättigheter. För att analysera resultatet har en implementeringsteori använts, med ett fokus på läraren som närbyråkrat, alltså en person som ansvarar för implementeringen av politiska beslut i vardagen. Undersökningen visar att det finns en implementeringsproblematik som lärarna i viss mån var medvetna om, men detuppdagades även problematik vid implementeringen som lärarna gav uttryck för, för att inte veta. Resultatet visar att problematiken uppstår då läraren inte har de resurser,främst i form av tid för att implementera kunskapskravet om de mänskliga rättigheterna. Ytterligare aspekter som påverkar är lärarens perspektiv på mänskliga rättigheter, eller snarare vilka perspektiv de inte har, men även lärarens stora tolkningsutrymme av styrdokumenten.

Museo de la Memoria y los Derechos Humanos (MMDH) in Santiago, Chile is dedicated to the depiction of a difficult heritage. This museum of memory and human rights narrates the military dictatorship in Chile 1973–1990, a time when thousands of people were subjected to unthinkable human rights violations committed by the Government Junta of Chile. Memorial museums exist worldwide and aim to depict a specific historical event when people have been victimized by the state. By showcasing the crimes committed by the junta, MMDH seeks to contribute to the culture of human rights to prevent human rights violations from reoccurring in the future; a culture of Nunca Más (Never Again). In this thesis, the permanent exhibitions of MMDH have been studied through the lenses of representation and discourse theory. The purpose has been to understand the way in which the museum depicts the dictatorship and whether the goal of contributing to a human rights culture was visible in the material that is presented in the exhibitions. The results show that MMDH depicts a story using different themes primarily relating to the crimes committed by the Chilean state and the civilian population’s fight for human rights. In the exhibitions, several themes evoke emotions and can generate a real impact on the visitors. However, the museum presents its material without analysis or interpretation and it disclaims placing the dictatorship in a historical and political context, which can inhibit the educational purpose of the museum. In addition, since the exhibitions lack educational material on human rights and democracy, the categorization of being a museum of human rights with the goal of contributing to a culture of human rights, is insufficient. In the discourse of the exhibitions present at MMDH there is an apparent inclusion and exclusion of narratives which can be explained by the museum’s political link in a country that to this day is undergoing a process of dealing with its past. This is a two-year master’s thesis in Museum and Cultural Heritage Studies.

Palmolja sägs vara världens mest resurseffektiva oljegröda och återfinns i bland annatlivsmedel, oleokemikalier och biobränsle. Mer än varannan produkt i dagligvaruhandlarinnehåller palmolja. Den höga efterfrågan har gjort palmoljeindustrin attraktiv att investera i och att många aktörer är involverade. En lång aktörskedja gör industrin svår att kontrollera, ansvarstagandet brister och en komplex hållbarhetsproblematik uppstår. För uppnå hållbarhet krävs samspel mellan ekologi, samhälle och ekonomi. Idag överutnyttjas naturens resurser vilket leder till att samspel mellan dimensionerna inte nås. För att få bättre förståelse och inblick i den komplexa hållbarhetsproblematiken tog vi del av experters och aktörers olika perspektiv. För studien valdes en kvalitativ intervjumetod som kartlägger miljökonsekvenser som ansågs störst. Sedan återges lösningsmöjligheter att skapa en mer hållbar palmoljeindustri. Resultatet visade att möjliga lösningstågärder bör baseras på ett tydligt definierat och ökat ansvarstagande för problem och konsekvenser som uppstår på grund av palmoljeindustrin. / Palm oil is known for being an efficient and productive crop and can be found in for example food, chemicals and biofuel. Up to every second product in grocery stores contains palm oil. Today's high demand of palm oil makes the industry attractive for investments while involvement from several actors makes the industry hard to control and lack of responsibility occurs. Those factors are of major menace for a sustainable palm oil industry. To achieve sustainability an interaction between ecology, society and economy needs to arise. Nature's resources are today over-exploited which leads to a non-interaction within the earlier mentioned dimensions. This study maps what we consider the greatest environmental issues and possible measures are to create a more sustainable industry. The result shows that increased and clearly defined responsibility for all actors involved in the industry needs to appear and improve to create sustainability.

The revival of citizenship deprivation raises numerous normative, legal and practical concerns. Although citizenship deprivation is not new, it has become crucial to further discuss this with regards to recent law amendments and practices on citizenship deprivation by many democratic states. Sweden is still one of few countries where citizenship is an absolute right protected by constitutional law. Nonetheless, politicians in Sweden have, over the last years, discussed the possibilities to enact the constitution to legalise denationalisation based on national security grounds. Several motions have been submitted to investigate these possibilities, but no amendments have yet been proposed.  The thesis aims, therefore, to examine whether there are legal obstacles that limit the possibilities to introduce a new provision on citizenship deprivation in Sweden. The main research question is: Are there legal obstacles to tackle terrorism through denationalisation in Sweden? To answer this question, the legal dogmatic methodology is used. The study analyses legislative sources, case law and doctrinal literature. It also reviews national regulations on citizenship deprivation in five European countries that have reformed their Citizenship Acts.  The study concludes that there are several legal obstacles in both international and EU law that limit the possibilities to denationalise citizens. However, it is not entirely illegal to deprive individuals of their citizenship. To introduce the possibility of citizenship deprivation in Sweden, the provision should fulfil the following criteria: a) denationalisation should not render a person stateless, b) the provision should not be discriminatory and apply to all citizens with dual citizenship, regardless of how they became citizen, c) prior to making the decision on denationalisation, a proportionality assessment between the individual's interest and the state's interest should be applied, d) denationalisation should have a legitimate purpose and it should be the least burdensome procedure to achieve this purpose, e) Swedish law should identify the crimes that can lead to denaturalisation, f) the decision on denaturalisation should be made at the same trial as the person in question is convicted, g) the individual should have the possibility to appeal the decision and his right to a fair trial is granted.  To conclude, the thesis emphasises that the collective development in national laws and practices on citizenship deprivation will potentially lead to a new interpretation of both EU and international law on human rights.

Uppsatsens syfte är att utreda hur den kantianska rätten till liv förhåller sig till Europakonventionens. Frågorna som använts för att uppnå syftet är hur både kantianismen och Europakonventionen förhåller sig till abort, dödsstraff, eutanasi och suicid. Metoden som har använts för att jämför kantianismen med Europakonventionen är en komparativ metod och för att tolka Kants texter används hermeneutik. Hur förhåller sig kantianismen till Europakonventionen gällande rätten till liv, utifrån abort, dödsstraff, eutanasi och suicid? Kantianismen har en långt mycket striktare syn på vad som är rätt och vad som är fel. Och de mänskliga rättigheterna härleds inte från en politisk konsensus. Det går att räkna ut vad som är en rättighet och vad som inte är det. Vad som är en plikt och vad som inte är det. Vilket självfallet skiljer sig från Europakonventionen som är ett så kallat levande instrument. Den är föränderlig och kantianismen är rigorös. Frågan om legaliteten bakom eutanasi tillhör konventionsstaterna. Likaså frågan om selektiv abort och när ett foster anses börja livet. Konventionen tillåter självmord och terapeutiska aborter och förbjuder dödsstraff kategoriskt. I jämförelse tillåter kantianismen dödsstraff för att straffa mördare och den tillåter även att göra en terapeutisk abort. Kantianismen förbjuder däremot självmord och eutanasi. Selektiv abort kan vara tillåtet beroende på hur samhället och omgivningen behandlar en havande eller någon med barn. Dock är ett foster likväl en människa och förtjänar en rätt till att leva. / The purpose of the thesis is to investigate how the Kantian right to life relates to the European Convention on Human Rights. The questions used to achieve the purpose are how both Kantianism and the European Convention relate to abortion, the death penalty, euthanasia, and suicide. The method that has been used to compare Kantianism with the European Convention is a comparative method and hermeneutics is used to interpret Kant's texts. How does Kantianism relate to the European Convention on the Right to Life, based on abortion, the death penalty, euthanasia and suicide? Kantianism has a much stricter view of what is right and what is wrong. And human rights are not derived from a political consensus. It is possible to calculate what is a human right and what is not. What is a duty and what is not. Which of course differs from the European Convention, which is a so-called living instrument. It is changeable and Kantianism is rigorous. The question of the legality of euthanasia belongs to the States Parties. Likewise, the question of selective abortion and when a fetus is considered to begin life. The convention allows suicide and therapeutic abortions and categorically prohibits the death penalty. In comparison, Kantianism allows the death penalty to punish murderers and it also allows for a therapeutic abortion. Kantianism, on the other hand, forbids suicide and euthanasia. Selective abortion may be allowed depending on how society and the environment treats a pregnant woman or someone with children. However, a fetus is nevertheless a human being and deserves a right to live.