Latest decision summaries

  • Date of Decision:12/18/2018 Reg.No:1179-2018

    Försäkringskassan has allegedly violated the statutory requirement on objectivity by rewarding officials who reject many claims

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:12/18/2018 Reg.No:7477-2017

    An investigation of municipalities processing time, in cases pursuant to the Support and Service for Person with Certain Functional Impairments Act (LSS)

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:12/12/2018 Reg.No:242-2017

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Employment, Financial Assistance and Social Welfare Board in Kramfors municipality for not taking a formal decision on limited custody following a custodian’s request for extended custody

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:12/11/2018 Reg.No:5216-2017

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Social Welfare Board in Halstahammar municipality for a number of failures when processing a case pursuant to the Support and Service for Person with Certain Functional Impairments Act (LSS)

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:12/5/2018 Reg.No:722-2017

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Swedish Police Authority for their processing of found passports

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:12/5/2018 Reg.No:1270-2017

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Social Services Board in Jönköping municipality for failure to investigate and issue decisions due to an aid application for a court-imposed care order

    Hide information

    Summary

    A man was prosecuted by the district court for assault, among other things. Rather than receiving a prison sentence, he received probation with an instruction for a treatment plan, referred to as a court-imposed care order (Chapter 30, Section 9, Second Paragraph 3 Swedish Penal Code).

    For a court to impose a care order, the court need to have access to an on-going investigation into an individual’s personal circumstances as well as the conditions pursuant to enforcing such a sentence. Hence, in cases where care orders are issued, the court must obtain a statement, referred to as a presentence report investigation, from the Swedish Prison and Probation Service. The Prison and Probation Service must provide the investigation necessary for the statement. Proposals for a treatment plan must be investigated and established by the Swedish Prison and Probation Service. The proposal should be formulated in consultation with the social services. The cost of a care order is divided between the Prison and Probation Service and, as a rule, the social services.

    The district court obtained a presentence report investigation from the Prison and Probation Service. The man applied to the board for assistance for the aid assessment for the care order. However, the board did not examine the man’s aid application for the care order, due to circumstances related to the staffing situation. Nor was a decision issued on the matter. Consequently, the Prison and Probation Service was without the basis to submit a proposal to the district court, outlining suitable treatment as an alternative to a prison sentence.

    In the decision, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen states that the statement and proposal for a treatment plan form the grounds for the court’s choice of sentence for an individual. In practice, the court cannot impose a care order on an individual if they are without a treatment plan. Hence, a plan proposed by the Prison and Probation Service can be of great importance to an individual.

    The failure of the Social Services Board to investigate and issue a decision regarding the man’s aid application for a court-imposed care order meant that the Prison and Probation Service was unable
    to submit a treatment plan proposal to the court. According to the Parliamentary Ombudsmen this is unacceptable. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Social Services Board for their failure to investigate and issue a decision regarding the man’s aid application for the court-imposed care order.

  • Date of Decision:12/4/2018 Reg.No:5958-2017

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Technical Board in Norrköping municipality and the Police Authority for shortcomings in the processing of a permit application to use public land for a terrace area and the revocation of the permit

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:12/4/2018 Reg.No:6539-2017

    The Board for Family Law in Solna, Sundbyberg and Ekerö municipalities receives criticism following a failure to inform the parties in a custody enquiry regarding an investigation before it was submitted to the court

    Read more
Search