The scope of this thesis in public law discussed the abstract judicial review in Sweden and Germany, which is practiced by a specified organ. In Sweden, the abstract judicial review is practiced by the Council on Legislation, and in Germany by the German Federal Constitutional Court.

This study focuses on how the Swedish Council on Legislation and the German Constitutional Court differ in the practice of the abstract norm control. Moreover, a theoretical discussion is applied to regarding whether the Swedish justice system is in need of setting up a constitutional court or whether the Swedish Council on Legislation should be in a stronger position.

Throughout this study, we concluded that the Swedish legal system is not in need to establish a Constitutional Court or another organ for the maintenance of an adequate standard norm control in Sweden.

To this end, we suggest that the abstract norm control in Sweden by the law's compatibility with the constitution should be strong, but that there may be reason to further strengthen the review of the Council on Legislation. For instance, enhancing the investigation could be done by creating a legal secretariat and subsequently emphasizing the council’s independence from the parliament and government. By reinforcing the council with legal expertise, such as linking draftsmen to the council, can thus make the council’s opinion legally binding.