Oaktsamhet i förhållande till ålder vid sexualbrott mot barn - Hur ska nya 6 kap 13 § BrB förstås?

Sammanfattning: Acquittals in cases of child sexual abuse have repeatedly been criticized in the social debate. Not least when it comes to perpetrators not being considered having reason to assume that a child was under age, although the child being as young as 11-12 years old. The critique has been legitimate when regarding the problems before the change of the statutory regulation on July 1st, 2018. The efficiency had lessened as a result of a narrow interpretation of the wording. Body development was crucial in case law which led to inconsistent ruling and inadequate protection. The legislators have tried to rectify the problems with a new amendment and elaborate explanatory statements. This paper examines how the amendment, almost a year after its’ implementation, shall be interpreted. The essays case law analysis shows the results of uniform application an broadened negligence. Even though the regulation is not supposed to be interpreted as a duty to control age, it has that tendency. Body development is not considered the same way as before and the assessment of evidence has become more uniform. The new amendment is reasonable considering how the ruling was before. Although the law does not guarantee the change being permanent. The amendment itself is not extensive. Children who look like they are a couple of years older that they are, are continuously exempted from being protected, which tends to affect children of certain gender and ethnicities. Total neglection of body development is key for obtaining a reasonable legislation.