About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

20 Eur. Energy & Envtl. L. Rev. 45 (2011)
Swedish Electricity Certificates Act and Its Compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights, The

handle is hein.kluwer/eelr0020 and id is 45 raw text is: European Energy and Environmental Law Review April 2011 45

The Swedish Electricity Certificates Act

The Swedish Electricity
Certificates Act and its
compatibility with the European
Convention on Human Rights
Prof. Dr. Petra Inwinkl, StB*
Jennifer Rosenberg**
Abstract
The Swedish government encourages the development
of electricity produced from renewable sources using
an electricity certificates system. The system is
regulated in the Swedish Electricity Certificates Act
(lag (2003:113) om elcertfkat). The regulation
imposes a penalty fee on producers for those that have
received certificates grounded on incorrect or
misleading information. Once the penalty fee has been
charged, the legislation does not allow any
adjustments, even in the case of an unjustified penalty.
This article addresses the question whether this
scheme is compatible with art. 6 of the European
Convention on Human Rights (the Convention). It is
concluded that the penalty fee how it is regulated in
the Electricity Certificates Act is not in conformity
with the Convention and therefore does not comply
with EU law. Regulatory changes are needed in the
sense that the Electricity Certificates Act has to take
into account any reasons for reducing a penalty fee.
I. Introduction
The Directive 2009/28/EC establishes a common
framework for the energy use from renewable
resources in the European Union (EU) with the
purpose of limiting greenhouse gas emissions and
promoting cleaner transports. It determines that 20
percent of all the energy used in the EU shall be
provided from renewable energy sources by the year of
2020. To this end, every Member State has been given
its own binding target percentage of renewable sources
in its gross final consumption.'
In attaining Sweden's target percentage an impor-
tant measure for the country is the already in 2003
implemented electricity certificates system. Electricity
certificates (hereafter certificates) are given as govern-
ment contributions to the owners of electricity
production plants for every mega-watt hour electricity
they produce from renewable sources, on the condi-
tion that they fulfill certain standards. The certificates
can subsequently be sold to get an extra income meant
to cover the higher costs that often comes with

production from renewable sources. The price on the
certificates is not decided from extra costs but between
every buyer and seller, hence it is decided by supply
and demand. The demand is secured from the quota
obligation which means that producers of electricity
must own a certain amount of certificates.
To avoid fraudulent behavior and wrongly issued
certificates appearing on the market, the Swedish
Electricity Certificates Act2 contains a penalty fee for
those who receive certificates because they have given
incorrect or misleading information. The penalty fee is
calculated as 150 percent of the mean price during the
year prior to the decision of the penalty fee. It shall be
noted that the producer must keep the certificates and
can save or sell them which means that the penalty is
in reality 50 percent of the mean price.3 The Swedish
government has an interest in that certificates are not
issued for the wrong reasons since every certificate
issued on wrong grounds represents one megawatt-
hour of unclean electricity entering the market. In
the long run this can result in that the target
percentage in Dir. 2009/28/EC from calculations
seems to be reached when it is in reality not. If a
member state has not reached its target percentage by
the year of 2020 the European Commission (EC) can
commence infringement proceedings against that
member state on the grounds for failure to fulfill an
obligation under the Treaties.4
The Electricity Certificates Act contains no rules of
reducing or removing the penalty fee, nor is the
penalty fee subject to any evidentiary issues when the
decision of it is appealed to a court. This implies that
the rules are in breach of general principles of law such
as the principle of proportionality and the principle of
legal certainty. There is reason to compare this scheme
with the Swedish tax surcharge system, as the rules for
the latter have been changed to comply with the
European Convention on Human Rights5 (hereafter
the Convention).6 The penalty fee could be in breach
of art. 6 of the Convention and the Convention as
such. The presumption of innocence in art. 6 of the
Convention could require the existence of some kind
of evidentiary issues. Further on, the fact that there
* Associate Professor, Department of Accounting and Law,
J6nkoping International Business School, Sweden.
** Jdnk6ping International Business School, Sweden.
1 Dir. 2009/28/EC, p. 46.
2 Lag (2003:113) om elcertifikat.
3 Electricity Certificates Act, chapter 6, art. 7 and chapter 5,
art. 1, s. 2.
4 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, art.
258 and 288.
5 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, of 4 November 1950, ETS No. 5.
6 Vdstberga Taxi Aktiebolag and Vulic v. Sweden, Judgment
of 23 July 2002, application number: 36985/97 s. 82, and
Janosevic v. Sweden, Judgment of 23 July 2002, application
number: 34619/97 s. 71.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most