Staten hör dig: En utredning av hemlig telefonavlyssning i förhållande till rättssäkerhet och integritetsskyddet

Sammanfattning: For several years, the law enforcement authorities have received severe criticism for their handling of secret telephone tapping. The criticism concerned systematic errors in their routines regarding both the destroying of materials obtained through secret telephone tapping and in notifying individuals about its use. The authorities have also used secret telephone tapping without the required permission. In one case, the illegal telephone tapping had been ongoing for three weeks. This raises such questions as how the intended use of telephone tapping differs to its use in practice. The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the theoretical and practical application of secret telephone tapping in relation to The Rule of Law and to the right to privacy. The widespread use of telephone tapping means that the law enforcement authorities extensively obtain privacy-sensitive information, which risks resulting in the mapping of an individual's personal affairs. The main question in this thesis is therefore: Is the theoretical and practical application of secret telephone tapping in accordance with The Rule of Law and with the right to privacy in 2 chapter 6 § RF and Article 8 ECHR? The main question in the essay is answered after Peczenik's theory of The Rule of Law is applied to the handling of secret telephone tapping. In this thesis I conclude that the theoretical application of secret telephone tapping is in accordance with The Rule of Law, even though there are some flaws which, inter alia, relate to the lack of transparency of judgments and arbitrary assessments in the Prevention Act. In the practical application, there are significant shortcomings in relation to The Rule of Law. These flaws relate to unlawful telephone tapping, for which the authorities are not held accountable for. In addition, the court's impartiality and independence can also be questioned, considering that the court has affirmed 99.4 % of all interim decisions. When comparing the theoretical and practical handling of telephone tapping, it can be concluded that the theoretical application is in stronger accordance with The Rule of Law than the practical application.