No description available.

The topic that will be presented in the following paper intends to analyse whether the tools given in the Swedish constitution can be seen as sufficient in the light of the ever-changing political landscape. Due to the recent delays in the Swedish process of government formation it is relevant to examine whether this could be caused by constitutional regulations that are no longer useful due to a change in the political field. The topic is highly relevant because it is currently, in the fall of 2021, an ongoing process. The governmental formation process will be the centre of attention in this paper. The process will be analysed on the basis of legal text along with relevant literature. Through a legal investigation and a historical and theoretical overview the aim is to determine whether the tools given in the current constitution can be deemed sufficient when considering an ever-changing political landscape. The most important conclusion is that the interest of fairness must constantly be weighed against the interest of effectiveness. Therefore, the conflict of interest that can arise between these two phenomenons will come to be the deciding factor when determining whether the current constitution can be deemed sufficient or not. From a historical point of view the main question of the paper can be answered with a yes, the tools in the current constitution can be seen as sufficient. This conclusion is based on the fact that so far all crises in governmental formations have been solved by using the tools given in the constitution. But whether the tools can be deemed sufficient in a political landscape that keeps on changing is questionable, it depends on what importance is given to fairness and efficiency respectively.

No description available.

Swedish hereditary kingship was not without its problems. In March 1792, Gustav III was assassinated leaving an immature heir to the throne. The direct succession of Gustav IV Adolf was impossible as he had not yet reached the age of majority. This example epitomises this study’s focal point –the hereditary kingship’s challenges. This is a study of the hereditary kingship’s formation and practices. It sheds light on how the hereditary kingship dealt with challenges through constitutional law and how the transfer of power was portrayed ceremonially. Closely connected with the transfer of power, are the underlying concepts of kingship. Normally the succession occurs through one king’s funeral and the following king’s coronation, however it could also take place through abdication or coup d’état. The study consists of two analytical parts. The first part aims to elucidate the formation and practices of the hereditary kingship with an exposé beginning in 1544: the establishment of the hereditary kingship. The second part focuses on the immaturity of Gustav IV Adolf up until he reached the age of majority in 1796. The findings show that the formation of the hereditary kingship and its practices display certain themes when power is transferred and when challenges are overcome. These includethe notion of unity, to be chosen, legality, to fulfil one’s role as ruler, and continuity. The results also show that hereditary kingship adapts to meet its challenges and that these themes are omnipresent and part of a constantly ongoing process when power is transferred. In Gustav IV Adolf’s case, the constitutional law dictated how the regiment was to be organised. In addition, his guardian Charles was granted Royal Authority and acted as Regent. The saying which composes the title of this study illustrates the natural transfer of power; albeit that this transpired gradually. The conclusion is a deepened understanding of the words: The king is dead, long live the king.

<p>The topic of this master thesis in legal science is state law and constitutional law, or more specific judicalization, with the division of power and thus increased individual legal rights in various forms. Sweden has traditionally had a weak constitutional protection for the individual’s legal rights. The public power has been concentrated to the government and the courts have only played a marginal role. Since the implementation of the European convention of legal rights and with the ever-increasing importance of the legal system of the European Union, the Swedish legal system gone through changes of historical dimensions.</p><p>This master thesis is based on the legal dogmatic method where laws, preparatory work, case law and doctrines have been systemized. The purpose of this thesis is to exemplify a global trend; the judicalization and its following consequence and implication on the national legal system. The aim is also to evaluate the constitutional protection in Sweden after the propositioned changes of Regeringsformen in a de lege ferenda-perspective.</p><p>The conservative sovereignty of the Swedish people has been challenged by, from national standpoints, xenogeneic thoughts concerning division of power and increased power for the courts, which in turn puts the traditional democratic principles on their edge. An expert commission, Grundlagsutredningen, was put together to review the Swedish constitution, Regeringsformen. The review has resulted in a proposition which questions some important constitutional matters. The expert commission has propositioned a stronger judicial preview through the Swedish legal Counsel Lagrådet, and also suggested a stronger judicial review by changing the possibilities of the courts to try laws against the constitution. These changes, together with the fact that the autonomy and the increased power of the courts are stressed in a new chapter in Regeringsformen, imply that the political power has to take a step back. The development, the judicalization, clearly accentuates the judicial power on behalf of the courts. This in turn increases the protection for the individual’s fundamental human and legal rights. These incentives are of course hard to ignore as the Swedish constitution for once is competing on an international level. The new changes are positive as a corrective against for instance the abuse of power, and only case law can provide us with outcome in a prospective perspective.</p> / <p>Ämnet för denna magisteruppsats i rättsvetenskap är statsrätt och konstitutionell rätt, eller mer specifikt judikalisering, och därmed maktdelning och ökat rättighetsskydd i olika former. Sverige har traditionellt sett haft ett förhållandevis svagt skydd för individuella fri- och rättigheter. Den offentliga makten har varit koncentrerad till regering och riksdag och domstolarna har endast spelat en marginell roll. Inkorporerandet av Europakonventionen för mänskliga rättigheter och EU-rättens allt större inflytande i svensk rätt har medfört att det svenska rättsystemet genomgått förändringar av historiska dimensioner. Den hävdvunna folksuveräniteten har ställts mot artfrämmande tankar på maktdelning och ökad domstolsmakt, vilket i sin tur ställer demokratiprinciperna på sin spets.</p><p>Föreliggande arbete bygger på rättsdogmatisk metod där olika rättskällor tolkats och systematiserats. De rättskällor som i första hand har använts är lagar, rättspraxis, förarbeten och juridisk doktrin. Uppsatsen syfte är att beskriva en global trend; judikaliseringen, om dess implikationer på rättsutvecklingen och det politiska livet. Intentionen är vidare att de lege ferenda värdera det svenska grundlagsskyddet efter de föreslagna ändringarna av regeringsformen som nyligen lagts fram i propositionen, [En reformerad grundlag].</p><p>Häri innefattas i synnerhet Grundlagsutredningens arbete med att skapa en samlad översyn av regeringsformen. Grundlagsutredningen har efter ett regeringsdirektiv från 2004 kommit med förslag till en reformerad grundlag. Förslagen tar bland annat sikte på laggranskningen och normprövningen som båda stärks väsentligt i förhållande till tidigare utgångspunkter. Lagrådets förhandsgranskning görs obligatorisk och det så kallade uppenbarhetsrekvisitet för lag- och normprövning slopas. Dessa ändringar tillsammans med det faktum att domstolsmakten stärks, genom att frigöras från förvaltningen, medför att den politiska makten inskränks till förmån för den judiciella. Utvecklingen, judikaliseringen, som tydligt markerar ökad domstolsmakt och skyddet för den enskilde individens fri- och rättigheter medför således svårignorerade incitament i form av ett stärkt konstitutionellt rättighetsskydd. De nya bestämmelserna i regeringsformen är adekvata och endast praxis kan visa om dessa är tillräckliga i ett nationellt, internationellt och i ett prospektivt perspektivt.</p>

The topic of this master thesis in legal science is state law and constitutional law, or more specific judicalization, with the division of power and thus increased individual legal rights in various forms. Sweden has traditionally had a weak constitutional protection for the individual’s legal rights. The public power has been concentrated to the government and the courts have only played a marginal role. Since the implementation of the European convention of legal rights and with the ever-increasing importance of the legal system of the European Union, the Swedish legal system gone through changes of historical dimensions. This master thesis is based on the legal dogmatic method where laws, preparatory work, case law and doctrines have been systemized. The purpose of this thesis is to exemplify a global trend; the judicalization and its following consequence and implication on the national legal system. The aim is also to evaluate the constitutional protection in Sweden after the propositioned changes of Regeringsformen in a de lege ferenda-perspective. The conservative sovereignty of the Swedish people has been challenged by, from national standpoints, xenogeneic thoughts concerning division of power and increased power for the courts, which in turn puts the traditional democratic principles on their edge. An expert commission, Grundlagsutredningen, was put together to review the Swedish constitution, Regeringsformen. The review has resulted in a proposition which questions some important constitutional matters. The expert commission has propositioned a stronger judicial preview through the Swedish legal Counsel Lagrådet, and also suggested a stronger judicial review by changing the possibilities of the courts to try laws against the constitution. These changes, together with the fact that the autonomy and the increased power of the courts are stressed in a new chapter in Regeringsformen, imply that the political power has to take a step back. The development, the judicalization, clearly accentuates the judicial power on behalf of the courts. This in turn increases the protection for the individual’s fundamental human and legal rights. These incentives are of course hard to ignore as the Swedish constitution for once is competing on an international level. The new changes are positive as a corrective against for instance the abuse of power, and only case law can provide us with outcome in a prospective perspective. / Ämnet för denna magisteruppsats i rättsvetenskap är statsrätt och konstitutionell rätt, eller mer specifikt judikalisering, och därmed maktdelning och ökat rättighetsskydd i olika former. Sverige har traditionellt sett haft ett förhållandevis svagt skydd för individuella fri- och rättigheter. Den offentliga makten har varit koncentrerad till regering och riksdag och domstolarna har endast spelat en marginell roll. Inkorporerandet av Europakonventionen för mänskliga rättigheter och EU-rättens allt större inflytande i svensk rätt har medfört att det svenska rättsystemet genomgått förändringar av historiska dimensioner. Den hävdvunna folksuveräniteten har ställts mot artfrämmande tankar på maktdelning och ökad domstolsmakt, vilket i sin tur ställer demokratiprinciperna på sin spets. Föreliggande arbete bygger på rättsdogmatisk metod där olika rättskällor tolkats och systematiserats. De rättskällor som i första hand har använts är lagar, rättspraxis, förarbeten och juridisk doktrin. Uppsatsen syfte är att beskriva en global trend; judikaliseringen, om dess implikationer på rättsutvecklingen och det politiska livet. Intentionen är vidare att de lege ferenda värdera det svenska grundlagsskyddet efter de föreslagna ändringarna av regeringsformen som nyligen lagts fram i propositionen, [En reformerad grundlag]. Häri innefattas i synnerhet Grundlagsutredningens arbete med att skapa en samlad översyn av regeringsformen. Grundlagsutredningen har efter ett regeringsdirektiv från 2004 kommit med förslag till en reformerad grundlag. Förslagen tar bland annat sikte på laggranskningen och normprövningen som båda stärks väsentligt i förhållande till tidigare utgångspunkter. Lagrådets förhandsgranskning görs obligatorisk och det så kallade uppenbarhetsrekvisitet för lag- och normprövning slopas. Dessa ändringar tillsammans med det faktum att domstolsmakten stärks, genom att frigöras från förvaltningen, medför att den politiska makten inskränks till förmån för den judiciella. Utvecklingen, judikaliseringen, som tydligt markerar ökad domstolsmakt och skyddet för den enskilde individens fri- och rättigheter medför således svårignorerade incitament i form av ett stärkt konstitutionellt rättighetsskydd. De nya bestämmelserna i regeringsformen är adekvata och endast praxis kan visa om dessa är tillräckliga i ett nationellt, internationellt och i ett prospektivt perspektivt.

Public liability regarding violations of the European Convention on HumanRights (ECHR) in Sweden is a given fact; member states, including Sweden, responsiblefor such violations are liable to compensate the individuals whoserights have been violated. Since 2014, a right to compensation for certain stateviolations of the second chapter – the human rights chapter – in the Instrumentof Government (1974:152), one of Sweden’s constitutional laws, has been establishedin case law. In 2020, a Swedish Government Official Report was published,which examined whether a basis for compensation should be establishedin the Tort Liability Act (1972:207) for violations in general of the second chapterof the Instrument of Government. The parliamentary committee investigatingthe matter concluded that such a basis should be established as it wouldstrengthen legal certainty and increase the state’s accountability for violations ofhuman rights stated within the constitution. However, as the inquiry was limitedto the second chapter of the Instrument of Government, the question of thestate’s liability concerning violations of other chapters in the Instrument of Governmentremains unanswered.This thesis examines the state’s liability in violations of certain articles in thefirst chapter of the Instrument of Government from a public law perspective,using a legal doctrinal method. Accountability in this thesis is not limited to tortsand therefore include other ways to attain non-pecuniary reparation, as torts isthe last resort for individuals in terms of effective remedies. To examine suchaccountability, the thesis firstly surveys the evolution of public liability in violationsof the second chapter of the Instrument of Government, which is basedon obligations following the ECHR. Secondly, application of Articles 1, 2 and 9in the first chapter of the Instrument of Government is accounted for. Thirdly,the relation between principles and rights within the first chapter of the Instrumentof Government and the ECHR is examined.The findings within the three parts are thereafter brought together to determinehow public liability in violations of the first chapter of the Instrument ofGovernment works, concluding that accountability relating to that of the secondchapter of the Instrument of Government might be enforceable although thelack of case law and practice in general makes the prospect too uncertain for legalrepresentatives to strive for. Hence, leading to the final conclusion that the matterneeds to be inquired upon to a more extensive level – preferably in the formof a dissertation or as a Swedish Government Official Report.

No description available.