Rättens diskursiva makt: en studie av det svenska rättsväsendets bemötande av häktningskritiken

The Swedish legal system has been under heavy criticism for its use and regulation of pre-trial detention since the beginning of the 90’s. The CPT and the CAT have been engaged in the issue, urging Swedish authorities to take action to address the critical conditions. Despite this, the conditions for pre-trial detention in Sweden appear unaltered. The Swedish legal system’s response to the heavy criticism appears passive. This study aims to reveal the discursive patterns in the Swedish legal system’s response by analyzing a selection of the documents, which the Swedish legal authorities published during the peak of the recurring criticism. The study makes use of the tools of Fairclough’s three-dimensional model to identify some overarching discursive patterns and to contextualize the patterns in relation to power structures in society. The result of the study proves that the Swedish legal system’s response has been heavily influenced by a system-oriented discourse. The discourse is characterized by rational reasoning and a process of reformulating the criticism into legal terms. The approach enables the actors of the legal system to distance themselves from the critique and to frame the problem as a systematic shortcoming. However, there are signs of discursive battle, as there are discursive tendencies that deviate from the system-oriented discourse. The result of the study highlights how the ideal of nomocracy is limited by the discursive imbalance between the individual and the judiciary. Further, the judiciary’s discursive power is limited by normative influences from other spheres