Om kontaktförbud. En uddlös skyddsåtgärd eller en lagstiftning tyngd av förväntningar?
Sammanfattning: The contact prohibition act (1988:688), or restraining order (RO), has received increased attention in the media lately. Newspapers have occasionally reported incidents with deadly violence, usually concerning a female victim to violence performed by a male who is in close relationship to the victim (intimate partner violence, IPV), where there existed a granted (or not granted) RO. The regulation in question has been submitted to quite extensive criticism, mostly from representatives from the movement of the rights of victims. Several reports from the national council of crime prevention (NCCP, Brå) have come up with the conclusion that improvements could have been done. This thesis has the overall purpose of providing a demonstration of the contact prohibit act, as well as to illustrate some of the more problematic aspects, and also to review the criticism regarding the regulation as well as its enforcement and practice. This thesis also wishes to portray the parties, which constitutes these cases. The aim of this thesis is further to provide answers to questions such as if there is reason for the criticism, and also if stated inadequacies regarding the regulation and its enforcement can be explained and then possibly repaired. The questions thus have the aim of examining and giving an insight in some of the difficulties which shape these cases: partially based on the fact that the regulation from the start created high expectations regarding its effects from a victim perspective. Among the conclusions can be found the fact that the regulation seems to have inadequacies, foremost regarding the enforcement, which makes the criticism somehow legitimate. This thesis has also tried to prove that the theory of the ideal victim as well as other theories from a victim perspective are fruitful when to analyze the complex relations in RO cases. The requirements for ROs are strict, and the enforcement of the regulation is restrictive. Science shows support for the fact that the enforcement could be less restrictive. At least it supports an evaluation regarding in which group of offenders the RO proves most efficient, according to the crime prevention purpose, and from studies carried out in the field of IPV and different levels of risk.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)