Accountability for serious human rights violations and atrocity crimes has established itself at the top of the international community’s legal agenda, not least to serve justice to the victims of the crimes. Efforts to refer the atrocities in Syria to the permanent International Criminal Court have been in vain, highlighting the need for third states exercising extra-territorial jurisdiction. Sweden has answered the call to investigate the crimes, and the strong position afforded to victims of crime in the Swedish criminal justice system suggests that it is well-suited to provide them the justice they are entitled to. This article draws on the experiences gained in the seven trials to date in which victims have participated, to assess the extent to which international legal obligations towards the victims are implemented and were accessible to the victims. Through analysis of legal documents and interviews, the author demonstrates that, while the Swedish system has been fulfilling a wide range of international legal obligations towards victims of crime, the remoteness in time and place, the large number of victims involved and other specifics of the investigations and trials, challenge several central aspects of the Swedish system, such as the right to information, support and reparation.
This thesis takes its starting point from the need for a comprehensive approach towards justice following atrocities, and where not only the states in which the crimes were committed have a role to play. The thesis discusses atrocity crime (genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes) prosecution and reparations procedures concerning individuals as two appropriate courses of action, through which non-territorial states may contribute to atrocity prevention and justice for the victims of atrocities. The analysis addresses whether, under international law, non-territorial states are allowed to, required to, or prohibited from facilitating prosecution and reparations procedures and includes an assessment of the extent to which international law relating to reparations fails to correspond to that applicable to prosecution. The implications of the lack of correspondence are analysed in light of the historical connection and separation of the two courses of action, the procedural and substantive legal overlaps between prosecution and reparations, and the underlying aims and functions of prosecution and reparations. The study covers a wide spectrum of international legal sources, most of them to be found in human rights law, humanitarian law and international criminal law.
The study shows that while non-territorial states are included in both conventional and customary law as regards prosecution of atrocity crimes, the same cannot be said in relation to reparations procedures. This serious deficit and inconsistency in international law, is explained by the framing of reparations, but not prosecution, as a matter concerning victims and human rights, thereby leaving the enforcement of the rules to the discretion of each state. Reparation is also considered a private matter and as such falls outside the scope of the far-reaching obligations regarding prosecution. The study suggests taking further the responsibilities of non-territorial states in relation to atrocity crimes. Most urgently, measures should be considered that bring the legal space for reparations procedures into line with that for prosecution in, for instance, future discussions by human rights treaty-monitoring bodies and in the drafting of new international victims' rights, atrocity crimes or civil procedure instruments.
Consideration of victims and how best to acknowledge their rights and position in the criminal prosecution process has become an intrinsic part of the drafting and negotiation of new international criminal law instruments. In studies of states’ implementation of international victims’ rights, Sweden often places at the top of the class. This article challenges the concept of successful implementation of human rights norms by critically analysing the conformity of Swedish law with international legal obligations towards victims of crime. It further contributes to existing literature describing the factors that may facilitate or obstruct such implementation, and demonstrates that Sweden’s position as a model of successful implementation is more the result of the historical position given to victims of crime in the country than of its commitment to live up to its international obligations. The article also raises doubt as to the Swedish government’s commitment to assuring that Swedish national law upholds its present conformity with international law norms, protecting victims into the future.
Som en del i uppmärksammandet av Umeås 400-årsjubileum arrangerade juridiska institutionen, tillsammans med Umeå kammarmusikförening, den 31 maj 2022 en rättshistorisk afton på hovrätten. Fanny Holm från juridiska institutionen var en av initiativtagarna och berättar här tillsammans med sin kollega Görel Granström vad som hände när man väckte liv i en rättegång från år 1676 där pigan Karin anklagades för häxeri.
Våld, hot och trakasserier mot förtroendevalda på grund av deras politiska uppdrag är ett allvarligt problem, både för den individ som utsätts och för det demokratiska systemet. Artikeln undersöker vilket ansvar som åvilar olikaaktörer att ge förtroendevalda skydd mot brottsutsatthet och stöd när brott har begåtts. En analys av det rättsliga ramverket visar att förtroendevalda om-fattas av generella regler för brottsoffer, men att aktörernas ansvar för olika kategorier av politiker skiljer sig åt, och att det mer omfattande förebyggande arbete som arbetsmiljölagstiftningen tar sikte på, inte gäller denna grupp. Författarna efterlyser en översyn av det rättsliga ramverket i syfte att åstadkomma likvärdigt skydd och stöd för alla förtroendevalda.
Så många som 40 000 personer tros ha rest från andra länder för att ansluta sig till IS i Syrien och Irak. Många av dessa s.k. terroristresenärer hålls idag internerade i det kurdiska självstyrets läger i Syrien och bland dem finns män, kvinnor och barn från Sverige. Situationen i lägren väcker en rad folkrättsliga frågor. Artikeln belyser den svenska regeringens agerande utifrån de folkrättsliga ramarna för frihetsberövande, straffrättsligt ansvarsutkrävande och repatriering av medborgare. Den visar att den svenska hanteringen av lägren präglats av ambivalens, och diskuterar om detta kan förklaras utifrån de folkrättsliga normernas vaghet och motstridighet, sambandet med internationell terrorism och den aktuella inrikespolitiska debatten