frsrdg · GK04JO1 · 1997-01-01 00:00:00 — I have not found either that the requisite conditions for malfeasance as laid down in 20.1 of the Criminal Code are fulfilled. The protection guaranteed by 2.6 of the Instrument of Government (the ) against the scrutiny of letters or other private communications almost certainly extends not only to ordinary items of post but also to the organised regular conveyance of communications to private individuals by public authorities (cf. and Ragnemalm, Grundlagar //, 1980, p. Thus, the way in which deals with post at its residential facilities should per se be covered by this section of the Instrument of Government. The question is, however, whether the actions of described here can be regarded as constituting the form of investigation of confidential items of post referred to in the wording of the law. In view of the fact that confidentiality is given particular prominence in this wording, it is the content of the communication which enjoys constitutional protection (cf. Government 1973:90 p. 242 f.). According to the National Aliens Boards description of its routines, it is not the Boards intention to study the contents of the postal items. It cannot, however, be ruled out that the interest in the post addressed to residents displayed by the staff of the residential facilities could give rise to knowledge of a confidential nature. It has not therefore been demonstrated without any shadow of doubt that the routines adopted by are in full agreement with the constitution. This uncertainty should give rise to some degree of reconsideration. Article 8 of Convention is probably intended to apply mainly to measures involving a much higher degree of intervention than those referred to here (see Lorenzen, Rehof & , Den Europæiske Menneskeretskonvention med kommentarer, 1994, p. 246 ff.). The cases involving interference with the right to correspondence which have been heard in Court have primarily dealt with opening, censoring or retaining letters (see , Theory and Practice of Convention on Human Rights, 2nd. 1990, p. 392 ff.). The question of the permissibility of measures of the kind involved in this case has probably not been brought before the court. The wording of Article 8 in the Convention does not, however, exclude the possibility that the practices described by could be regarded as being in breach of the article. As has been made clear, in its routines involving post to its residential facilities cannot be regarded as being guilty of any obvious contravention of the law. Despite this, I would like to express some reservations about these routines. The reason why the staff of the residential facilities take care of the post is to ensure that the various items reach their addressees. What is happening in this case is that the staff are using this routine for a different purpose than the one it is supposed to serve. When an agency avails itself of its powers to achieve an end other than the one intended, it becomes guilty of abusing its powers détournement de pouvoir and in other words oversteps its authority. References to this may be found in the periodical Förvaltningsrättslig tidskrift 1995, p. 150 f., and the sources referred to there. In my opinion, in this case is not far from the kind of situation in which it could be accused of such an offence. Furthermore, I should like to draw attention to the risks that a systematic scrutiny possibly combined with registration and copying of post can involve for the and the recipient. Information on envelopes makes it possible to draw conclusions of various kinds about the addressee and his family, such as their political and religious affiliations, membership in and contacts with organisations. I am presuming that the scrutiny that takes place at the National Aliens Boards residential facilities is not of such a nature and such an extent that it enables investigation of the personal circumstances of those who send letters or the refugees who receive them. In the light of what is said above, I consider that there is good reason to question the appropriateness of the routines described here. If these routines are, nevertheless, to go on being used, applicants should at any rate be told about the procedure in advance. One possibility would be to ensure that the forms they sign state explicitly that items of post which are judged to be relevant when assessing the size of the daily allowance will be registered by the staff of the facility. 1 slogs de myndigheter som ingick i de s.k. huvudprogrammen 14 i försvarsmakten. arméförband, marinförband, flygvapenförband och operativ ledning m.m. samman till en myndighet benämnd Försvarsmakten. Chefen för myndigheten kallas överbefälhavaren. Överbefälhavaren biträds av ett ledningsorgan kallat högkvarteret. 2 utförs Sjukvårdsstyrelsens uppgifter av stabs- och ledningskaraktär av en sjukvårdsledning i Försvarsmaktens högkvarter. Tillsynen över efterlevanden av lagar och andra författningar avseende hälso- och sjukvård m.m. utövas av en särskild tjänsteman i Försvarsmakten, generalläkaren, som i detta avseende inte är underställd överbefälhavaren. Torde avse JO 1981/82 s. 132, här anmärkt. var resp. söndag, här anmärkt. 2 Jfr även prop. 1990/91:58 bil.1 s. 148 I beslutet konstaterade JO bl.a. att självfallet borde ha underrättat läkaren om sitt beslut att anmäla honom till men då det av allt att döma rört sig om ett förbiseende i ett enstaka ärende lät JO det bero med vad som förevarit i saken. Se JO:s ämbetsberättelse 1994/95 s. 392.