Advertisement

Human Dignity in Sweden

  • Mona Haghgou StrindbergEmail author
Living reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter examines the concept of human dignity in Swedish law. The focus lies mainly on human dignity in Swedish constitutional law and various legal acts which acknowledge the dignity of human beings. The chapter further explores the constitutional recognition and possible legal meanings of human dignity. Despite the formal recognition of the concept of human dignity in Swedish Constitution, there is no clarity about the definition of the notion. Human dignity operates less as an enforceable norm and more as a guiding principle which legal actors resort to in a nonfunctional and noninstitutional manner. The chapter also looks at the substantive and functional dimensions of human dignity and asks what it would take for it to evolve into an enforceable legal norm with practical consequences in the Swedish legal system, which would require the sort of constitutional adjudication, academic discussion and public debate still lacking in Sweden.

Keywords

Discrimination Equality Integrity Fundamental rights Human dignity Human rights Human value Legal capacity Right to (have) rights Rule of law 

References

  1. Att säkerställa en god statsförvaltning (2016), Värdegrundsdelegationens slutrapportGoogle Scholar
  2. Glendon MA (2001) A world made new: Eleanor Roosevelt and the universal declaration of human rights. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Gustafsson LH (2008) Människovärde, värdighet och yrkesetik. Socialmedicinsk tidskrift 2008(6):454–462Google Scholar
  4. Hägg I (2014) Alla människors lika värde eller människans värdighet. Tidskrift för Politisk Filosofi 18(3):10–28Google Scholar
  5. JO-beslut (2011) Initiativärende: Inspektion av Migrationsverkets förvar, dnr 6090–2009Google Scholar
  6. Statens Medicinsk­Etiska Råd (2012) Det svårfångade människovärdet – en debattskrift, Omarbetad upplaga, Etiska vägmärken 4Google Scholar
  7. Warldon J (2011) Sir David Williams Lecture entitled ‘the rule of law and human dignity’. Cambridge UniversityGoogle Scholar

Preparatory Works

  1. Regeringens proposition 1975/76:209 Om ändring i regeringsformenGoogle Scholar
  2. Regeringens propositionen 2002/03:65 Ett utvidgat skydd mot diskrimineringGoogle Scholar
  3. Regeringens proposition 2007/08:95 Ett starkare skydd mot diskrimineringGoogle Scholar
  4. Regeringens proposition 2009/10:83 Etisk bedömning av nya metoder i vårdenGoogle Scholar
  5. Regeringens proposition 1996/97:147 Ändring i utlänningslagens förvarsbestämmelserGoogle Scholar
  6. Regeringens proposition 1997/98:173 Verkställighet och återvändande - en del av asylprocessenGoogle Scholar
  7. Regeringens proposition 2013/14:106 PatientlagGoogle Scholar
  8. Regeringens proposition 2015/16:135 Ett Övergripande ramverk för aktiva åtgärder i syfte att främja lika rättigheter och möjligheterGoogle Scholar
  9. SOU 1972:15 Ny regeringsform, ny riksdagsordningGoogle Scholar
  10. SOU 1975:75 Medborgerliga fri­ och rättigheter. Betänkande av 1973 års fri­ och rättighetsutredningGoogle Scholar
  11. SOU 2017:104 Etikprövning – en översyn av reglerna om forskning och hälso- och sjukvårdGoogle Scholar
  12. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Concluding observations on the combined twenty-second and twenty-third periodic reports of Sweden (2018) CERD/C/SWE/CO/22-23Google Scholar
  13. EU, OJ C 303 (2007) ‘Explanations Relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights (2007/C 303/02)’, Official Journal of the European UnionGoogle Scholar

Case Law

  1. AD 2009 nr 27Google Scholar
  2. AD 2011 nr 13Google Scholar
  3. Ahmed Hussein Mustafa Kamil Agiza v. Sweden (CAT/C/34/D/233/2003) UN Committee Against Torture (CAT), 24 May 2005Google Scholar
  4. Chahin v. Sweden (CAT/C/46/D/310/2007), UN Committee Against Torture (CAT), 8 July 2011Google Scholar
  5. Mondal v. Sweden (CAT/C/46/D/338/2008), UN Committee Against Torture (CAT), 7 July 2011Google Scholar
  6. Munir Aytulun and Lilav Guclu v. Sweden (CAT/C/45/D/373/2009), UN Committee Against Torture (CAT), 3 December 2010Google Scholar
  7. X v. Sweden (Application no. 36417/16)Google Scholar
  8. I v. Sweden (Application no. 61204/09), 20 January 2014Google Scholar
  9. R.C. v Sweden (Application No. 41827/07)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lawyer Prio AdvokatbyråStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations