Straffvärdebedömningen vid grova narkotikabrott

Sammanfattning: This essay describes the assessment of penal value concerning grave narcotic offenses. Up until 1923 narcotics did not have a legal meaning in Sweden, but as it was introduced in society and an addiction started spreading, the legislation also started to evolve around it. When it began to be known what intoxicative and addictive effects narcotics brought with it, and that these preparations started ending up in the hands of the young people it became a real problem for the society. The opinions were strong about how to solve the problem and the result after an effective struggle was public preventive measures. The penalties for drug offences were raised gradually and by this the society really wanted to show how serious they regarded drug offences to be. Narcotics made its way long before international wise, which lead to several conventions and framework concerning that area. This in its turn had a big impact on our national legislation in many ways. Since all Nordic countries advocated and pursued a narcotic free area, consequently the legislation was adapted accordingly. In 1968 the drug penal law was incorporated which is applicable yet today and consists of a total of nine paragraphs. This together with a number of other laws and regulations are the ones that regulate narcotics legally. A big change in the legislation was the addition of criminalization of personal use that was incorporated in 1988. Something unique concerning drug offences are the charts that has been developed through case law and after guidelines made by the Court of appeal in Skåne and Blekinge (HSB), and they are used in the assessment of penal value. The charts are build up after amount and what kind of narcotics it is concerning. It has come to realization after survey of case law that these charts have created a misleading and uneven result. The reason is mainly because the lower courts without hesitation followed the charts recommended penal value. Both the amount and the kind of narcotics are important factors in the assessment of penal value, but just as the preparatory work already have pointed out has the Supreme Court now chosen to revaluate how the assessment of penal value should be done and instead put significant weight to remaining circumstances in the drug cases. In summer of 2011 the Supreme Court sentenced in a case which outcome became the essential change in case law. The change concerns the grave narcotic offenses. Earlier the kind and amount of narcotics quickly made the penalties reach higher levels in the scale, but now the Supreme Court said that a gradation of case law is required and a larger space in the upper parts of the range of punishments should be used only for the really grave cases. As drug offences were taken to be sentenced in the Supreme Court this new assessment of penal value had an impact and even new charts are under construction to better suit the new existent case law. 1 This new case law has come to mean that the Supreme Court has gotten a new milder view on drug offences that before would have gotten really high penalties. All this has happened without a public debate and it seems as if politics have been left outside. Why this change came when it did, despite the fact that it is no innovation from the legislator’s side can only be speculated in. A presumed cause can of course be of what composition of judges we have in the Supreme Court today and that has resulted in that a change of the view of what is considered to be a grave drug offence or not now could happen. With this change it will be harder for the prosecutors when it comes to the claim of sanction. However, this will hopefully lead to a more fair and proportional case law where the offender (most often it is men) gets the “right” penalty. Focus from the police side could come to be transferred from the minor drug offences to be on the heavy criminals that deal with narcotics mainly for the purpose of economical profit. Now it is desirable that the politicians adapt themselves to this new point of view. That the high penalties would decrease the problems of narcotics has been shown to be incorrect and maybe now a more liberal view on narcotics is on its way to enter. Treatment should be the first priority concerning the addicts on the street, and more resources should be given to the police so they can build enough evidence together with the prosecutors so the offenders behind the really serious and grave drug offences get convicted. The Supreme Court has shown their position in the invincible debate and now remains to see what is the next step. Hopefully in long terms we can see a decreased spread of narcotics in society and thereby a decreased problem of narcotics. We have a long way to get there and with our strict view that we have on narcotics, there is more to obtain to reach the ultimate solution and see if it has the effect that is wanted.