Får det finnas några osäkerheter? - En granskning av mutbrottens legalitet utifrån ett kritiskt rättssäkerhetsperspektiv.

Sammanfattning: The legal regulation of giving and receiving bribes affect a wide range of individuals. Despite the reform that took place in 2012, the provisions of The Swedish Penal Code regarding this area are difficult to interpret and generally vague. Furthermore, there is still no legal definition of the element of "undue advantage," which distinguishes a permissible advantage from an impermissible one. What is considered undue varies depending on societal conditions and the nature of the activity in question. Thus, the concept can have different meanings in different contexts. Given that the issue of what circumstances are relevant to the assessment of undue advantage is not thoroughly motivated in the legislative history and that recent guiding precedent is absent, one may wonder what guidance legal practitioners have regarding which circumstances should be significant in the assessment of what constitutes an undue advantage and therefore a bribe. The main purpose of this essay is to examine the legality of bribery offences. To achieve this aim, several sub-questions have been designed, such as where the line between a gift and a bribe is drawn. The uncertainties surrounding this area have raised questions about legal security. Therefore, an analysis has also been conducted regarding what problems of legal certainty the vague boundary, in combination with the absence of an attempt point, gives rise to. How this relates to the predictability requirement and other fundamental principles that permeate Swedish criminal law has also been analyzed. In this regard, it is concluded that a vague boundary and the absence of an attempt point constitute a problem from a legal certainty perspective but provide protection from a perspective of corruption. An imprecise boundary allows flexibility for legal practitioners in the assessment of undue advantage, providing a wider scope of protection against corruption. However, these conditions have a negative effect on legal certainty because of the decreasing predictability, which makes it more difficult for individuals in terms of upholding the law and relate to. Another sub-question in the essay is to examine how intent is assessed. When it comes to the undue advantage element, the intent requirement does not mean that the perpetrators own perception of what is undue is decisive. The factual and legal circumstances that form the basis for this assessment must be encompassed by the perpetrator's intent. The conclusion drawn is that the objective circumstances are significant factors in the intent assessment. The parties are assumed to know what is punishable, and objections about lack of knowledge of the laws content are rarely accepted by the court. This circumstance, in combination with the uncertainties that characterize this area, has prompted an analysis regarding whether the intent assessment in bribery offenses is compatible with the principle of guilt in criminal law.