- Kommentator er professor Iain Cameron ved Uppsala universitet.
- Midtveisevalueringen ledes av professor Inger Johanne Sand, Universitetet i Oslo.
- Veiledere er professorer Erling Johannes Husabø, Universitetet i Bergen, og førsteamanuensis Anders Løvlie, Universitetet i Oslo.
For tekstutkast, kontakt Ingvild Bruce.
Om avhandlingen
The topic is the legal regulation of the preventive use of surveillance measures in the protection of national security. More specifically, it addresses the legislation on the national police- and intelligence services´ access to measures such as communication-, audio- and camera surveillance of individuals with the purpose of pro-actively preventing, rather than reactively investigating, for example terrorist attacks and espionage.
The adoption of legislation allowing preventive use of surveillance measures forms part of a general trend visible in many subject areas, towards greater access for public authorities to intrusive measures with the aim of increasing security by reducing risk and preventing crime. This thesis, however, adopts a legal perspective and is placed in the crossroads between criminal law and procedure, police law and the legal regulation of national intelligence services.
The overall aim of the thesis is to determine and explain the legitimate place of the preventive use of surveillance measures in a democratic Rechtsstaat. The tools used to achieving this aim is a legal analytical framework founded on the fundamental principles of a democratic Rechtsstaat and a comparative analysis of the Dutch, Norwegian and Swedish national legislation on the preventive use of surveillance measures. By measuring the compared legislation against standards emanating from an ideal that the three states are bound by, committed to and identify with, the thesis seeks to reveal whether and to what extent the principles of a democratic Rechtsstaat actually affect the justification and content of the legislation on the preventive use of surveillance measures.
Moreover, based on the interaction between the analytical framework and the national legislation, the thesis discusses whether, how and to what extent such legislation may be justified. Furthermore, the thesis aims to suggest how legislation on the preventive use of surveillance measures can be designed in order to respect as fully as possible the principles of such state, and thus also to guide the future development, interpretation and application of such legislation. Lastly, the thesis aims to contribute to a more constructive climate for debate about the legislation on the preventive use of surveillance measures, by providing a framework for discussion rooted in an ideal that (most of) the parties wish to uphold.