Abstract
Unlike many other Western European countries, Sweden has had an astoundingly low rate of omnibus legislation in its legislative history, in particular if looking at the “deep” omnibus legislation, i.e. the model of legislation which regulates different topics, but where their regulation lacks a unifying underlying function, at least from a legal perspective. The purpose of this chapter is not only to present this peculiarity and investigate the specific reasons behind it (reasons that relate to the particular Swedish legal and political environment). The goal is also to attempt to draw some general conclusions (i.e. ones possibly valid outside the borders of the Scandinavian country), in particular as to the role of legal actors and legislative drafters on structuring the agenda for the discourses taking place in the political arena.
I would like to thank Jane Reichel, Peter Melz, Pernilla Leviner, Peter Wahlgren, and Jori Munukka for their extremely valuable inputs. I would also like to thank the Law Faculty’s Trust Fund for Publications, Stockholm University, Cassel Foundation, Stockholm University, and the Foundation for Jurisprudential Research for financial support during this study. The usual disclaimer applies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See Krutz (2001a), p. 1 (“Omnibus legislating is the practice of combining numerous measures from disparate policy areas in one massive bill”); and Gluck et al. (2015), p. 1804. See also Kardasheva (2009), p. 55 (where omnibus legislation is defined as the case where “two issues y and w can be joined in a single proposal and be voted on as a package”).
- 2.
- 3.
See, e.g., Schwartz (2013), pp. 1973–1974 (as to the flourishing at the national level of omnibus legislations in the area of data protection law as a consequence of the European Commission’s 1995 Data Protection Directive); the Canadian House of Commons (2011), p. 38 (where an omnibus bill is defined as “[a] bill consisting of a number of related but separate parts that seeks to amend and/or repeal one or several existing Acts and/or to enact one or several new Acts.”); or the same House of Commons (1988), p. 15880 (where Herb Gray, then Opposition House Leader, stated that an omnibus bill has “one basic principle or purpose which ties together all the proposed enactments and thereby renders the Bill intelligible for parliamentary purposes”). It is worth mentioning that sometimes, in the English-speaking parliamentary discussion, a distinction is made between a “proper omnibus bill” (mirroring the superficial omnibus legislation used in this work) and a “not proper omnibus bill” (similar to the deep omnibus legislation). See, e.g., the Canadian House of Commons (2012), p. 1205. This terminology is avoided in this work, due to the qualitative evaluation embedded in it.
- 4.
- 5.
See van Beek (1995), p. 6; and Gluck (2015), p. 97 (“omnibus bills… tend to bundle together bills drafted by different committees at different times, or by multiple drafters (often not even internal to Congress) that are not in communication with one another”). See also Gluck et al. (2015), p. 1805 (“Omnibus vehicles also sometimes mask transparency for certain objectives. The 2008 [financial] bailout, for instance, had a variety of individual goodies attached to it, ranging from subsidies for wooden arrow makers to those for racetrack owners”). See, e.g., Galnoor (2011), p. 90 (as to the use of omnibus legislation, or “arrangements law” as it is termed in Israel, to encompass many unrelated legislative issues); or McKay and Johnson (2010), p. 445.
- 6.
See Garrett (2002), p. 2; Ferejohn (1986), pp. 223–253; Krutz (2001b), p. 211; and Ruud (1958), p. 391. See also Krutz (2001a), pp. 30–43 (pointing out the various institutional political reasons, both of a micro and macro nature, behind the increasing use of omnibus legislation in a Western democracy like the U.S.A.); and Denning and Smith (1999), p. 974 (“omnibus bills often provide ideal political cover for members’ sops to influential constituencies”).
- 7.
The terms “omnibus legislation (or bill)” used in its deep meaning (or its Swedish translation, sammanläggning lagstiftning or proposition), does not appear in any relevant legislative documents or work of legal scholarship in the last 70 years. But see Wahlgren (2014), p. 69 (pointing out the increasing “lack of identity” when it comes to the contemporary Swedish legislative production, in particular due to its internationalization).
- 8.
Compare, e.g., Sinclair (2000), p. 72 (stating that “[o]mnibus measures have made up about 11 percent of major legislation in recent [USA] Congresses”).
- 9.
See, e.g., Leviner (2011), pp. 28–31, where the idea of superficial omnibus legislation overlaps, to a certain extent, with the Swedish concept of “framework legislation,” in Swedish ramlagstiftning. Cf. deZafra (1978), p. 276 (“these [omnibus] laws say what to do rather than how to do it; i.e. they set forth general principles rather than prescriptive requirements”).
- 10.
- 11.
See Hellner (1990), pp. 137–139 (stressing that the strive for internal coherence in each legislative act is the same for both drafters and legislative scholars). See, e.g., Wahlgren (2014), pp. 54–56 (pointing at the fact that the rules within the legislative document should be related in an unambiguous and systematic way, as a necessary criterion for the very legitimacy of the act); or Hellner (1990), pp. 199–216.
- 12.
See Krutz (2001a), p. 2; and Frantzich and Berube (2010), p. 256 (“Omnibus legislation that covers a wide range of topics provides the opportunity to buy the support of a wide range of members, who, while not agreeing with all the components, judge that the overall package provides more benefits than detriments”). See also Krutz (2002), p. 213. See, e.g., Miller (2009), p. 23.
- 13.
See Petersson (2015a), p. 98 (“Swedish political culture has been described as involving a pragmatic approach to decision-making and as stressing utilitarian considerations rather than rights- based principles… Among other things, this means that negotiations and compromise are preferred rather than overt conflicts and legal battles”).
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
- 17.
- 18.
- 19.
- 20.
- 21.
See Hellner (1990), p. 192 (as to the Swedish general “minimalist” tradition when it comes to the formation of the bills and acts, i.e. “not to include more explicit rules in an act than it is required by the factual circumstances”).
- 22.
See Sundberg (1978), pp. 232–237. See also Petersson (2015b), p. 650 (“Swedish system stands out because of its strong emphasis on the preparatory stages. Considerable time and effort is spent on investigations and discussions before a policy proposal becomes a government bill”); Tala (2005), p. 101 and pp. 112–113; and Wahlgren (2014), p. 88 (pointing out some of the negative effects of such system).
- 23.
- 24.
See Petersson (2015b), p. 650 (“When adjudicating a case, a Swedish judge does not primarily refer to legal precedents set by the courts of law. More important are the ‘travaux préparatoires’ of the policy process, which consist of a chain of legal sources such as legislative acts, parliamentary committee proposals, government bills, and, importantly, reports from the commissions of inquiry and results from the referral process”). See, e.g., Lind (1993), pp. 301–318; or Nergelius (1997), pp. 432–434.
- 25.
See Zamboni (2019), pp. 8–16.
- 26.
- 27.
- 28.
- 29.
- 30.
- 31.
See Bäck and Bergman (2015), pp. 210–211.
- 32.
- 33.
See Jensen (2000), pp. 210–236; and Mattson (2015), p. 679 (“Party discipline in voting is very strong which means that it is the parties and party leaderships that control the Members of Parliament”). See also Möller (2020), chapter 4. As pointed out by Christopher J. Kam, the Swedish legislative system is characterized by a rather strong autonomy of the members of the parliament when sitting in the drafting committees; however, at the same time, political parties maintain a strong hold on their fellows as soon as the work moves into the general assembly. See Kam (2009), p. 210.
- 34.
See Petersson (2015b), p. 658 (“Today around 75 percent of the commissions consists of one single person and in most cases a judge or a senior civil servant”). See also Axberger (1995), pp. 140–142 (where the author strongly criticizes this overlapping of role within the legislative law-making, in particular when the judges are involved as drafters).
- 35.
As pointed out previously, the drafter is usually picked from within the public apparatus (either from the public administration stricto sensu or among the judges with previous experience in the public administration). In Sweden, public servants are trained in an environment which tends to be strongly independent of the Government, from both an institutional perspective and a legal perspective. See Reichel (2007), pp. 104–105 (as to the Swedish dualist model, where there is a division in both organization and accountability between the government and the administration). See, e.g., Rosén (2011), pp. 796–798. See also Jones (1990), p. 153. But see Modéer (2011), pp. 745–747 and Öberg (2011), p. 770 (where both authors point out a recent shift towards a more political nature of the work made by the drafting committee).
- 36.
- 37.
See Hellner (1990), p. 138 and pp. 194–198. See, e.g., Heckscher (2011), p. 845. As pointed out by Kaarlo Tuori, “efforts in this direction [of politicizing the legislative drafting] constitute a constant source of disappointment for politicians and bureaucrats, who often enough see their political goals sacrificed on the altar of the internal rationality of the law.” Tuori (2002), p. 138.
- 38.
Among the institutional forces pushing the Swedish law-maker away from the omnibus legislation model, in theory one could also count the presence of the Council on Legislation (in Swedish, Lagrådet). This Council is a body composed of judges, who have previously served on one of the Supreme Courts, with the specific duty of evaluating bills sent to them by the competent departments and concerning central areas of law. According to Chapter 8, Article 22, section 2, of the Instrument of Government, among the other duties the Council has the one of controlling “the manner in which the various provisions of the draft law relate to one another.” See Hellner (1990), p. 137. However, the presence of such a legal institutional force should not be overestimated, at least when it comes to its capacity to block bills with an omnibus shape. First, the opinion expressed by this high evaluative body is a mere recommendation to the legislator, with no binding formal and (as praxis has shown) practical character. See Nergelius (2019), p. 336. See, e.g., Borg (2006), pp. 5–9. Second, since the qualitative evaluation by the Council on Legislation is taking place exclusively on the bill, this intermediary step could not stop hypothetical omnibus features to be attached to it later on, i.e. when the bill is transformed into an act after a discussion in front (and by decision) of the Parliament.
- 39.
- 40.
See Teubner (1989), p. 745 (1989); Cotterrell (1995), pp. 240–248; MacCormick (2008), pp. 11–12; and Zamboni (2007), pp. 130–131. See, e.g. Friedman (1986), pp. 27–28. “Radicalism” is the degree of change into legal language that the value expressed inside the political arena, i.e., in a political language, has to go through in order to be accepted into the legal order. This depends, among other things, on the national legal order under consideration, on the branch of law, and also on the dominant legal culture among the different legal actors. See Summers (2000b), p. 50; and Teubner (1996), p. 165. See also Luhmann (2004), pp. 366–367.
- 41.
- 42.
- 43.
- 44.
See Abbott et al. (2000), pp. 401–402 (2000) (as to the main components upon which the legalization of an institution, as the legislative law-making institutions in this case, may be measured). See Loughlin (2000), pp. 229–233 (as being this process a part of a more contemporary phenomenon of legalization of politics).
- 45.
- 46.
See Loughlin (2000), pp. 184–185.
- 47.
See Cormacain (2017), chapter 5; and Bellamy (2003), pp. 127–129 (as to the central role the law-making process plays in the very idea of rule of law). See also Summers (2000a), pp. 167–168; Habermas (1998), pp. 134–135; Luhmann (2004), pp. 362–363; Raz (1994), pp. 359–361; and Waldron (2000), p. 1845.
- 48.
See Kramer (2004), pp. 172–222; and Tamanaha (2012), pp. 236–246. See also Kelsen (1955), p. 77; Dworkin (1985), pp. 11–13; and Llewellyn (1971), pp. 130–135. But see Kairys (1998), p. 6. Cf. Taylor Hamara (2013), p. 22 (as to the difficulty in defining a political ideal, such as “the rule of law” is, where it is presupposed to have a clear idea of its essential legal component, i.e. what “law” is).
- 49.
- 50.
- 51.
- 52.
See Nzerem (2008), p. 132 (“In practice… a drafter often participates in defining the meaning of policy and in translating the broad terms of policy into the law’s details. Between policy and legislation, there are open spaces which the drafter may have to fill.”); Laws (2013), pp. 89–93; and Seidman et al. (2001), p. 6 and pp. 23–24. See, e.g., Laws (2011), pp. 1–16 (as to the central role in the legal system of the work of legislative drafters, in particular when misinterpreting the policies laid down by the political actors). But see Stefanou (2008), pp. 321–333 (with a more critical voice as to the actual influence of the drafting moment in a legislative process upon the policy-making).
- 53.
Cotterrell (1992), pp. 203–204.
References
Abbot A (1988) The system of professions: an essay on the division of expert labor. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Abbott KW, Keohane RO, Moravcsik A, Slaughter A-M, Snidal D (2000) The concept of legalization. Int Organ 54:401–419
Alexandersson P (2018) Socialtjänstens värdegrunder: Etik i förarbeten och lagar om fattigvård, socialvård och socialtjänst. http://esh.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1259728/FULLTEXT02.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Algotsson K-G (2001) From majoritarian democracy to vertical separation of powers: Sweden and the European Union. Scand Polit Stud 24:51–65
Anton TJ (1969) Policy-making and political culture in Sweden. Scand Polit Stud 4:88–102
Aubert V (1986) The rule of law and the promotional function of law. In: Teubner G (ed) Dilemmas of law in the welfare state. de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 28–39
Axberger H-G (1995) Tänka fritt är större. Juristförlaget, Uppsala
Bäck H, Bergman T (2015) The parties in government formation. In: Pierre J (ed) The Oxford handbook of Swedish politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 210–211
Balbus ID (1977) Commodity form and legal form: an essay on the “relative autonomy” of the law. Law Soc Rev 11:571–588
Bellamy R (2003) The rule of law. In: Bellamy R, Mason A (eds) Political concepts. Manchester University Press, Manchester, pp 118–130
Bergh A (2004) The universal welfare state: theory and the case of Sweden. Polit Stud 54:745–766
Bjerstedt D (2009) Tryggheten inför rättan. Lund University, Lund
Borg H (2006) Lagrådet -Rättssäkerhetsgaranti eller ren formalitet? https://timbro.se/app/uploads/2017/01/9175666235.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Bourdieu P (1987) The force of law: toward a sociology of the juridical field. Hastings Law J 38:814–853
Cormacain R (2017) Legislative drafting and the rule of law. https://sas-space.sas.ac.uk/6693/1/Cormacain%2C%20R%20-%20IALS%20-%202018.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Cotterrell R (1992) The sociology of law: an introduction, 2nd edn. Butterworths, London
Cotterrell R (1995) Law’s community: legal theory in sociological perspective. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Daintith T, Page A (1999) The executive in the constitution: structure, autonomy and internal control. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Dean HV (1997) The juridification of welfare: strategies of discipline and resistance. In: Kjonstad A, Wilson J (eds) Law, power and poverty. CROP Publications, Bergen, pp 3–27
Denning BP, Smith BR (1999) Uneasy riders: the case for a truth-in-legislation amendment. Utah Law Rev 1999:957–1025
deZafra DE (1978) A management model for the implementation of omnibus legislation: a case study from the U. S. Public Health Service. Public Adm Rev 38:276–280
Dworkin R (1985) A matter of principle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Esping-Andersen G (1990) The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Fast Lappalainen K (2019) Om skyddet mot retroaktiv beskattning -En studie i konstitutionell rätt. Stockholms universitet, Stockholm
Ferejohn J (1986) Logrolling in an institutional context: a case study of food stamp legislation. In: Wright GC Jr, Rieselbach LN, Dodd LC (eds) Congress and policy change. Agathon Press, New York, pp 223–253
Forslund A (1997) The Swedish model: past, present, and future. In: Giersch H (ed) Reforming the welfare state. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 121–162
Frantzich SE, Berube C (2010) Congress: games and strategies, 4th edn. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Plymouth
Friedman L (1986) The limits of law: a critique and a proposal. Center for Studies on Changing Norms and Mobility, Siegen
Galnoor I (2011) Public management in Israel: development, structure, functions and reforms. Routledge, London
Garrett E (2002) Attention to context in statutory interpretation: applying the lessons of dynamic statutory interpretation to omnibus legislation. Issues Leg Sch 3:6–12
Gluck AR (2015) Imperfect statutes, imperfect courts: understanding Congress’s plan in the era of unorthodox lawmaking. Harv Law Rev 129:62–111
Gluck AR, O’Connell AJ, Po R (2015) Unorthodox lawmaking, unorthodox rulemaking. Columbia Law Rev 115:1789–1866
Habermas J (1998) Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. The MIT Press, Cambridge
Håstad T (2011) Vad har vi rätt att vänta oss av kommittéväsendet? Svensk Juristtidning 2011:772–776
Heckscher S (2011) Reflektioner kring utredningsväsendet. Svensk Juristtidning 2011:844–847
Hellner J (1990) Lagstiftning inom förmögenhetsrätten -Praktik, teori, teknik. Juristförlaget, Stockholm
House of Commons [Dominion of Canada] (1988) Debates, 30 May 1988. Library of Parliament, Ottawa
House of Commons [Dominion of Canada] (2011) Glossary of parliamentary procedure, 7th edn. Canadian Government Publishing, Ottawa
House of Commons [Dominion of Canada] (2012) Debates, 11 June 2012. Library of Parliament, Ottawa
Howarth D (2013) Law as engineering: thinking about what lawyers do. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Jensen TK (2000) Party cohesion. In: Esaiasson P, Heider K (eds) Beyond Westminster and Congress: the Nordic experience. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, pp 210–236
Jones BM (1990) Sweden. In: Kingdom J (ed) The civil service in liberal democracies: an introductory survey. Routledge, Oxon, pp 143–162
Kairys D (1998) Introduction. In: Kairys D (ed) The politics of law: a progressive critique, 3rd edn. Basic Books, New York, pp 1–20
Kam CJ (2009) Party discipline and parliamentary politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kardasheva R (2009) Legislative package deals in EU decision-making: 1999–2007. http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/33/1/Kardasheva_Package_Deals_In_EU_Decision_Making.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Kelsen H (1955) Foundations of democracy. Ethics LXVI:1–101
Kennedy D (1998) A critique of adjudication (fin de siècle). Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Kramer MH (2004) Where law and morality meet. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Krutz GS (2001a) Hitching a ride: omnibus legislating in the U.S. Congress. Ohio State University Press, Columbus
Krutz GS (2001b) Tactical maneuvering on omnibus bills in Congress. Am J Polit Sci 45:210–223
Krutz GS (2002) Omnibus legislation: an institutional reaction to the rise of new issues. In: Baumgartner FR, Jones BD (eds) Policy dynamics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 205–229
Laws S (2008) Drawing the line. In: Stefanou C, Xanthaki H (eds) Drafting legislation: a modern approach. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 19–34
Laws S (2011) Giving effect to policy in legislation: how to avoid missing the point. Statute Law Rev 32:1–16
Laws S (2013) Legislation and politics. In: Feldman D (ed) Law in politics, politics in law. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 87–104
Leviner P (2011) Rättsliga dilemman i socialtjänstens barnskyddsarbete. Jure Förlag, Stockholm
Lind J (1993) Förarbeten som rättskälla. In: Anders A (ed) Festskrift till Bertil Bengtsson. Nerenius & Santérus, Stockholm, pp 301–318
Lind J (1996) Högsta domstolen och frågan om doktrin och motiv som rättskälla. Juridisk Tidsskrift 2:352–370
Llewellyn K (1971) Jurisprudence: realism in theory and practice. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Loughlin M (2000) Sword & scales: an examination of the relationship between law & politics. Hart Publishing, Oxford
Luhmann N (2004) Law as a social system. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Lund N (1993) Rational choice at the office of legal counsel. Cardozo Law Rev 15:437–505
MacCormick N (2008) Questioning sovereignity. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Mattson I (2015) Parliamentary committees: a ground for compromise and conflict. In: Pierre J (ed) The Oxford handbook of Swedish politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 679–690
Matz H (2011) Kommittéväsendet förr, nu och i framtiden. Svensk Juristtidning 2011:725–734
McKay W, Johnson CW (2010) Parliament and Congress: representation and scrutiny in the twenty-first century. Oxford University Press, Oxford
McLeod I (2009) Principles of legislative and regulatory drafting. Hart Publishing, Oxford
Miller N (2009) Environmental politics: stakeholders, interests, and policymaking, 2nd edn. Routledge, Oxon
Modéer KÅ (2011) Jurister på politikernas arenor. Svensk Juristtidning 2011:735–752
Möller T (2020) Political party dynamics and democracy in Sweden: developments since the ‘Golden Age’. Routledge, Oxon
Nergelius J (1996) Konstitutionellt rättighetsskydd: svensk rätt i ett komparativt perspektiv. Fritze, Stockholm
Nergelius J (1997) Domstolarna, grundlagen och rättighetsskyddet –några reflektioner kring de senaste årens debatt och praxis. Svensk Juristtidning 1997:426–457
Nergelius J (2015) Constitutional law in Sweden, 2nd edn. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rhijn
Nergelius J (2019) The constitution of Sweden and European influences: the changing balance between democratic and judicial power. In: Albi A, Bardutzky S (eds) National constitutions in European and global governance: democracy, rights, the rule of law. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, pp 315–358
Nightingale RL (2016) How to trim a Christmas tree: beyond severability and inseverability for omnibus statutes. Yale Law J 125:1672–1743
Norrman E, McLure CE Jr (1997) Tax policy in Sweden. In: Freeman RB, Topel RH, Swedenborg B (eds) The welfare state in transition: reforming the Swedish model. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 109–154
Nyman O (1988) Some basic features of Swedish constitutional law. In: Strömholm S (ed) An introduction to Swedish law, 2nd edn. Norstedts, Stockholm, pp 47–77
Nzerem RC (2008) The role of the legislative drafter in promoting social transformation. In: Stefanou C, Xanthaki H (eds) Drafting legislation: a modern approach. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 131–150
Öberg SA (2011) Kunskap och politik -mellan nonchalans och teknokrati. Svensk Juristtidning 2011:764–771
Odishaw CP (1988) Curbing legislative chaos: executive choice or congressional responsibility. Iowa Law Rev 74:227–248
OECD (2007) OECD reviews of regulatory reform: Sweden 2007 -achieving results for sustained growth. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2010) Better regulation in Europe: Sweden 2010. OECD Publishing, Paris
Peczenik A (1995) Vad är rätt? Om demokrati, rättssäkerhet, etik och juridisk argumentation. Norstedts Juridik, Stockholm
Peczenik A (1999) Lagstiftningen, domstolarna, rättsmedvetandet och rättsvetenskapen. In: Nergelius J, Peczenik A, Wiklund O (eds) Löser juridiken demokratins problem? -SOU 1999:58. https://www.regeringen.se/49bb77/contentassets/175b3882a0bd4ff28c67a509baa4e675/loser-juridiken-demokratins-problem. Accessed 10 Apr 2020, pp 7–54
Petersson O (2015a) Constitutional history. In: Pierre J (ed) The Oxford handbook of Swedish politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 89–102
Petersson O (2015b) Rational politics: commissions of inquiry and the referral system in Sweden. In: Pierre J (ed) The Oxford handbook of Swedish politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 650–662
Pierson C, Leimgruber M (2010) Intellectual roots. In: Castles FG, Leibfried S, Lewis J, Obinger H, Pierson C (eds) The Oxford handbook of the welfare state. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 32–44
Poggi G (1989) The development of modern state: a sociological introduction. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Popelier P, Verlinden V (2009) The context of the rise of ex ante evaluation. In: Verschuuren J (ed) The impact of legislation -a critical analysis of ex ante evaluation. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden, pp 13–37
Raz J (1994) The politics of the rule of law. In: Raz J (ed) Ethics in the public domain: essays in the morality of law and politics. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 354–362
Reichel J (2007) Svenska myndigheter som EU-myndigheter. In: Källström K, Öberg J (eds) Juridisk Tidskrift -Jubileumshäfte. Jure, Stockholm, pp 103–112
Reichel J (2011) European legal method from a Swedish perspective -rights, compensation and the role of the courts. In: Nielsen R, Neergaard UB, Roseberry L (eds) European legal method: paradoxes and revitalisation. DJØF Publishing, Copenhagen, pp 245–278
Rosén J (2011) Arbetet i utredning -finns det framgångsrecept? Svensk Juristtidning 2011:793–800
Ruud MH (1958) No law shall embrace more than one subject. Minn Law Rev 42:389–455
Sannerstedt A (1996) Negotiations in the Riksdag. In: Stenelo L-G, Jerneck M (eds) The bargaining democracy. Lund University Press, Lund, pp 17–58
Schick A (1987) The whole and the parts: piecemeal and integrated approaches to congressional budgeting. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington
Schultz M (2012) The impact of institutions and professions in Sweden. In: Mitchell P (ed) The impact of institutions and professions on legal development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 198–230
Schwartz PM (2013) The EU-U.S. privacy collision: a turn to institutions and procedures. Harv Law Rev 126:1966–2009
Seidman A, Seidman RB, Abeyesekere N (2001) Legislative drafting for democratic social change: a manual for drafters. Kluwer Law International, The Hague
Sinclair B (1998) Legislators, leaders, and lawmaking: the U.S. house of representatives in the postreform era. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Sinclair B (2000) Unorthodox lawmaking: new legislative processes in the U.S. Congress, 2nd edn. Congressional Quarterly Press, Washington
Socialtjänstlag (2001:453) [Kingdom of Sweden] (2001) https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/socialtjanstlag-2001453_sfs-2001-453. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Stefanou C (2008) Drafters, drafting and the policy process. In: Stefanou C, Xanthaki H (eds) Drafting legislation: a modern approach. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 321–333
Sterzel F (2015) Sverige. In: Jonsson Cornell A (ed) Komparativ konstitutionell rätt, 2nd edn. Iustus, Uppsala, pp 71–92
Strömberg H, Lundell B (2014) Allmän förvaltningsrätt, 26th edn. Liber, Malmö
Strömholm S (1988) Introduction. In: Strömholm S (ed) An introduction to Swedish law, 2nd edn. Norstedts, Stockholm, pp 21–45
Strömholm S (1996) Rätt, rättskällor och rättstillämpning: en lärobok i allmän rättslära, 5th edn. Norstedts juridik, Stockholm
Summers R (1997) How law is formal and why it matters. Cornell Law Rev 82:1165–1229
Summers R (2000a) A formal theory of the rule of law. In: Summers R (ed) Essays in legal theory. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 165–182
Summers R (2000b) Law as a type of “machine” technology. In: Summers R (ed) Essays in legal theory. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 43–54
Sundberg JWF (1978) Fr. Eddan t. Ekelöf: Repetitorium om rättskällor i Norden. Studentlitteratur, Malmö
Sundberg JWF (2000) High-tax imperialism, 2nd edn. Institutet för offentlig och internationell rätt, Stockholm
Sutton J (2001) Law/society: origins, interactions, and change. Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks
Svensson M, Urinboyev R, Åström K (2012) Welfare as a means for political stability: a law and society analysis. Eur J Soc Secur 12:64–85
Tala J (2005) Förarbeten och lagstiftningspolitik. In: Palmgren S (ed) Lagstiftningspolitik -Nordiskt Seminarium om Lagstiftningspolitik. Nordic Council of Ministers’ Publishing House, Copenhagen, pp 99–116
Tamanaha BZ (2012) The history and elements of the rule of law. Singapore J Leg Stud 2012:233–247
Taylor Hamara C (2013) The concept of the rule of law. In: Flores IB, Himma KE (eds) Law, liberty, and the rule of law. Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht, pp 11–26
Teubner G (1989) How the law thinks: toward a constructivist epistemology of law. Law Soc Rev 23:727–757
Teubner G (1996) Altera Pars Audiatur: law in the collision of discourses. In: Rawlings R (ed) Law, society and economy: centenary essays for the London School of Economics and Political Science 1895–1995. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 149–176
The Instrument of Government [Kingdom of Sweden] (1974). http://www.riksdagen.se/globalassets/07.-dokument%2D%2Dlagar/the-constitution-of-sweden-160628.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Tuori K (2002) Critical legal positivism. Ashgate, Aldershot
Uhlmann F, Höfler S (eds) (2016) Professional legislative drafters: status, roles, education. DIKE, St. Gallen
van Beek SD (1995) Post-passage politics: bicameral resolution in Congress. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh
van Hoecke M (2002) Law as communication. Hart Publishing, Oxford
von Sydow H (2007) Rättsstatens rötter -reformer av domarutnämningar. http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=1562821&fileOId=1566085. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Wahlgren P (2014) Lagstiftning -Rationalitet, Teknik, Möjligheter, 2nd edn. Jure, Stockholm
Waldron J (2000) Lex Satis Iusta. Notre Dame Law Rev 75:1829–1858
Weber M (1978) Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology. University of California Press, Berkeley
Weber M (1991) Politics as a vocation. In: Gert HH, Wright Mills C (eds) From Max Weber: essays in sociology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 129–156
Wind M, Martinsen DS, Rotger GP (2009) The uneven legal push for Europe: questioning variation when national courts go to Europe. Eur Union Polit 10:63–88
Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union (Consequential Provisions) Bill [Republic of Ireland] (2019). https://merrionstreet.ie/en/News-Room/News/Brexit_Omnibus_Bill.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2020
Xanthaki H (2013) Thornton’s legislative drafting, 5th edn. Bloomsbury Professional, West Sussex
Xanthaki H (2014) Drafting legislation: art and technology of rules for regulation. Hart Publishing, Oxford
Zamboni M (2007) The policy of law: a legal theoretical framework. Hart Publishing, Oxford
Zamboni M (2019) Methods of ex-ante evaluation in legislation: the Swedish model. In: Kim K-H (ed) Goals and methods of ex-ante evaluation of legislation. Korea Legislation Research Institute, Seoul, pp 3–31
Zander M (2004) The law-making process, 6th edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zamboni, M. (2021). (Absence of) Omnibus Legislation in Sweden: When Legislative Drafting Affects the Political Discourse. In: Bar-Siman-Tov, I. (eds) Comparative Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Omnibus Legislation. Legisprudence Library, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72748-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72748-2_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72747-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-72748-2
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)