Digital övervakning som processuellt tvångsmedel - förhållandet mellan hemlig dataavläsning och den personliga integriteten

Detta är en Kandidat-uppsats från Lunds universitet/Juridiska institutionen; Lunds universitet/Juridiska fakulteten

Författare: Pär Pettersson; [2017]

Nyckelord: Straffrätt; Law and Political Science;

Sammanfattning: Personal integrity has the benefit of enjoying protection regulated by the constitutional law. In order to answer the question, what is being protected, I look for the answers in this paper, using on one hand, philosophical definitions and on the other hand legal definitions. An unequivocal explanation of the concept of personal integrity does not exist. The Personal integrity is not absolute. A restriction may, inter alia, be made to meet society’s demands for effective law enforcement. Means of coercion are used for criminal investigations or for the purpose of conducting a criminal offense trial. The application of these means a balance between society’s demands for effective law enforcement and the individual’s requirements for integrity and legal certainty. There are therefore a number of general principles for balancing these interests, one of these are the principle of proportionality. Within coercive means there is a special category called secret coercive measures. Secret coercive means holds a special position in such a way that the person concerned is not aware of the action taking place. Secret data reading is a proposal for a new secret coercive measure. However this compulsive measure is problematic in terms of integrity. The method infer that law enforcement agencies can prepare access to, for example, a mobile phone by installing spyware that tells you how the equipment is being used in real time. Secret data reading will, among other things, be used for preventive intelligence purposes. According to the proposal, it will be used to preclude, prevent or detect criminal activities involving crimes for which no lighter punishment than when jail for two years is prescribed. I consider this limit being set too low. Personal privacy is too important to be constrained in a flippant manner, for this reason the proposal is disproportionate.

  HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)