Concerning a chief guardian’s obligation to obtain doctor’s certificates and make other inquiries in actions to end administration etc.

Summary of the decision: In the course of the parliamentary Ombudsman’s supervision, it has become apparent that the views of district courts and chief guardians differ on the question of whether chief guardians are obliged to assist the courts with supporting documentation in actions to end administration. In this case, the Parliamentary Ombudsman has investigated whether chief guardians have such an obligation.

In the opinion of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, it is not self-evident that under applicable law chief guardians are obliged to submit a report concerning such actions when injuncted to do so by the district court. The relevant provisions of the Children and Parents Code (SFS 1949:381) are not entirely clear on the matter, nor does the legislative history or the Supreme Court’s case law explicitly support such an interpretation. That said, the Parliamentary Ombudsman believes that there are compelling reasons for chief guardians to comply with any such injunction from the court.

She also states that the difference of opinions between chief guardians and district courts on this matter may prolong proceedings and cause other problems that will ultimately be to the detriment of the individual. Moreover, when an administrative authority does not feel able to comply with a court injunction, it may have a negative impact on public confidence in both the courts and other authorities. In light of this, the Parliamentary Ombudsman finds reason to raise the matter of amending legislation with the Government.

In her decision, the Parliamentary Ombudsman also makes certain statements concerning the obligation of administrative authorities to comply with court rulings and injunctions.