Överskottsinformation : En analys av SOU 2018:61 och de ändringar som utredningen föreslagit i regleringen av överskottsinformation enligt 27 kap. 23 § RB
Sammanfattning: The use of surplus information was previously an unregulated area, but in 2005 a new regulation was introduced that restricts the use such information arising from the use of secret coercive measures. Restrictions of this kind have been subject to discussion over the years and the reasons given for the need of restrictions have varied. The current regulation of surplus information was subject to criticism already during the legislative work. In recent years it has been questioned whether the regulation fulfills the requirements of the Swedish constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In 2017 a government committee was appointed to analyze whether the regulation was compatible with these requirements. The committee presented their proposals in a final report in 2018, but so far the government has not submitted a bill. In summary, the committee’s proposals imply an extension of the use of surplus information. The use of surplus information raises a number of issues related to the conflicting interests of an efficient law enforcement and personal integrity as well as procedural guarantees. Due to the foregoing, the purpose of this essay is to analyze and problematize SOU 2018:61 and the amendments proposed by the report concerning the regulation of surplus information. To achieve the purpose set out, this essay will, by using a legal dogmatic method, review the relevant fundamental freedoms and rights as well as criminal procedure law principles, account for applicable law, examine the reasons behind the restrictions stated in the current regulation, deal with ambiguities and problems that may arise from the current regulation and analyze the the new report and the proposals presented in 2018. In the final chapter, the essay raises several aspects regarding surplus information that are not addressed in the report which may be of importance for the government to take into account when drafting a bill. Furthermore, the essay observes and discusses a number of ambiguities and problems that the committee’s proposals may entail. In light of these ambiguities and problems, the essay also provides suggestions on how the proposals can be improved. Finally, the essay raises the question whether the regulatory framework regarding secret coercive measures may be in need of a more fundamental change.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)