Åklagarens objektivitetsplikt - Fallet Thomas Quick utifrån ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv

Sammanfattning: In recent years, the prosecutor's duty to act objectively has received special attention due to the case of Thomas Quick. During the 90’s, Quick confessed to over 30 murders, of which he was convicted for eight of them. However, all this changed in the year of 2008 when he took back his confessions. This led to a number of re-trials, where Quick eventually was cleared from all charges. Extensive criticism against the criminal proceedings has been made in both courts and the media. Against this background, the Bergwall Commission ruled that the duty to act objectively was waived in numerous cases by the prosecutor. The duty to act objectively is a fundamental principle in criminal law and forms a cornerstone in the prosecutor's role. The principle aims to guarantee the legal security for individuals and places high demands on the prosecutor. The main purpose of this essay is to examine the prosecutor's duty to act objectively and in what way it is important for the legal security. Therefore, the thesis mainly describes the duty of objectivity. Nonetheless, acknowledgments are also dealt with briefly. Moreover, the essay investigates the Bergwall Commission’s report and what is has led to. The thesis is characterized by a legal security perspective. The conclusion that can be drawn from the analysis is that the prosecutor's duty to observe objectivity is very far-reaching and in principle without exceptions. There is a strong connection between the duty and the individual's legal certainty. Therefore, deficiencies in complying with the duty of objectivity can have serious consequences for the legal security. Furthermore, it is stated that the Bergwall Commission's report has led to several changes within the Prosecutor's Office. Finally, the essay also discusses problems that may arise when fulfilling the duty of objectivity and possible necessary changes.