Sexköpslagen 2.0 Hur en utvidgad sexköpslag förhåller sig till kravet på dubbel straffbarhet

Detta är en Kandidat-uppsats från Lunds universitet/Juridiska fakulteten; Lunds universitet/Juridiska institutionen

Författare: Rikard Brodda; [2014]

Nyckelord: straffrätt; Law and Political Science;

Sammanfattning: Since 1998 Sweden has had legislation concerning prostitution that makes it legal to sell but not to buy sex. Sweden was at that time first in the world with this criminalization and since then several other countries followed the Swedish example. More recently it has been discussed whether this legislation should be extended to cover situations where Swedish citizens buy sex from prostitutes abroad. This essay will review some of the prerequisites for such legislation.

Criminalization must aim to protect a particular group of people, society in general or specific government functions. This so-called protective interest must be threatened by the act that is to be criminalized. The protective interest is established in preliminary work and should then be taken into consideration when the law is applied in the future. The essay will first determine the protective interest of the law against sex purchase from the preliminary work, then determine how effective the criminalization has been. The aim is to establish the protective interest in the possible scenario of an extended criminalisation.

An obstacle to the criminalization of sex purchase abroad is the requirement of dual criminality. In short, the requirement means that an act committed abroad must be criminalized both in Sweden and the country where it is committed for the perpetrator to be punished in Sweden. The requirement is not absolute, several crimes are exempt because they are considered to be too serious and the protective interest can not be protected effectively if there is a requirement of dual criminality. Critics argue that no such relevant interest can be defined in Sexköpslagen and an extended criminalisation can therefore not be justified. However, I do not agree, but consider an extension a prerequisite for fully protecting the protective interest.

  HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)