Under sekretess : Arkivariers resonemang och dilemman kring sekretessbelagda handlingar

Sammanfattning: Archivists tackle a variety of problems in their daily work, among them are issues concerning privacy-based material. This work demands a good understanding of the laws which govern this practice, laws comprising the Freedom of the Press Act (tryckfrihetsförordningen SFS 1949:105), the Public Access and Security Act (offentlighets- och sekretsslagen SFS 2009:400), and the Archival Law (arkivlagen SFS 1990:782). The main purpose of this thesis is to understand how archivists’ reason in relation to privacy-based material. To do this we gathered empirical material through qualitative interviews with archivists who worked at government archives and handled privacy-based material. The theory and methodology of phenomenography was used to capture and analyse variations in the archivists’ perceptions on privacybased material. Phenomenography, combined with the theory of street- level bureaucracy and the concept of discretion, comprise the theoretical framework applied in the thesis. Our conclusion is that archivists have discretion in the form of a possibility to act within the framework of the organisation and its laws. We found that time and experience were pivotal to their ability to use their discretion. We found that they used their discretion to form methods devised to work within the confines of the legislature. We also conclude that archivists’ reason about privacy-based material in three ways. The first one focuses on the law’ ambiguity and how knowing the law does not necessarily preclude a successful application. The second one concerned their reasonings related to academic research and journalism. We found that, though Swedish law promotes academic research, this did not always translate into archives doing the same, and, did not always by extension apply to journalism. Our final point focuses on the dissemination of information. We found that archivists have a lot of control over the material within the institution, but once released the digital progress creates new ways for spreading information. In the archives’ older court documents, digital dissemination was not a factor and some of the material being spread are clear invasions of citizens' privacy. This led to a majority of our informants’ drawing attention to the need to sharpen the legal framework.