Överklagandeinstitutet för häktningar i relation till principen om parternas likställdhet i processen

Sammanfattning: There is a common view among defence lawyers that applications for detention orders often are approved and that it is hard to have an appealed detention order annulled. A well-functioning institute of appeal is of utterly importance. With regard to the human rights that are restrained during detention, questions are raised regarding the appeal institute of detention orders. It is of social relevance to examine the Court of Appeal’s detention orders.   This essay aims to examine and analyse the institute of appeal concerning detention orders with regard to the principle of equality of arms. Two methods will be used: the legal dogmatic method and the social scientific method. A study is carried out to investigate the proportions between confirmed and amended appealed detention orders, and the grounds for the amended detention orders. Further, the probability to be released from custody when appealing a detention order to the Court of Appeal is examined. By analysing the study against the principle of equality of arms and the legal rules concerning detention, I intend to answer the question whether the institute of appeal regarding detention orders is well-functioning from a legal certainty perspective.   The results of the study show that the proportion of confirmed detention orders in the Court of Appeal is predominantly. The courts are using short and vague formulae as grounds for the decisions. Thus, it could therefore be questioned whether the courts have conducted a proper judicial review of the lawfulness of the detention. To have an appealed detention order amended in the Court of Appeal is difficult and to be released from custody when appealing a detention order is even more difficult. The probability is estimated at 3,9 %. The probability is greatest in the Court of Appeal for Southern Norrland, in comparison with Svea Court of Appeal in Stockholm and Göta Court of Appeal in Jönköping. The study shows that there is reason to question whether the principle of equality of arms has had an adequate impact in the court procedure regarding detention.