Politiken och principerna - Den nuvarande kriminalpolitiken och dess förhållande till principer för kriminalisering

Sammanfattning: When a socially relevant problem is identified by the state, the solution is often found in the sphere of criminal justice. The method is simple: more and harsher penalties are necessary. At the very least, it is easy to be led to believe so based on the public dialogue and the image presented by the media. At the same time, criminal law is governed by principles intended to uphold the restrictiveness of the system – principles which limit the violence capital of the state and the ability to intervene in citizens' lives. In summary, the present paper examines whether the criminal law policy under the current (Swedish) government is in accordance with two of the principles of criminalization - the principle of ultima ratio and the requirement of proportionality in penalty scales - found in the legal doctrine. The study consists of examining legislation proposals during 2018, 2019 and 2020 in light of these principles. The result of the study is that the principles of criminalization have only a limited impact on the criminal law policy. The general level of repression is, on the basis of the legislative proposals examined, increasing. Based on the proposals examined, it is particularly questionable to what extent the principle of ultima ratio affects the legislative work. Only in a few of the legislative proposals is the principle noticed. In general, clarification is desirable regarding which alternative options are available to rectify the identified problem, or, if no such alternatives exist, a statement which clarifies this. Discussions on the proportionality requirements of the penalty scale are more common in the proposals. However, it is not unusual for suggestions of increased penalty scales to be substantiated on diffuse grounds where, in particular, the existence of "the public's view" or other similar formulations as the basis for increased penalty scales appear to be particularly problematic. One possible explanation for the principles’ lack of impact in the criminal law policy is assumed to be that the criminal law is largely reactive - criminal law proposals often appear to be a reaction by the state to events that have already occurred or a presumed solution to existing problems. If it at the same time appears that society demands stricter penalties or an increase in criminalization, it is hardly surprising that the objective of the political course is to increase the level of repression – often at the expense of compliance with the principles.