Criticism of two police officers for failing to live up to the requirements of the Police Ordinance concerning how a police officer is to behave in contact with the public

Summary of the decision: One Saturday evening, two police officers knocked on the door of a man’s home. In the course of the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s investigation, they have stated that they were engaged in crime prevention and, among other things, wished to obtain information concerning frauds that had been committed in the neighbourhood. The police officers asked the man for his personal identity number and conducted a register search for him. They then entered the residence.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman notes that the circumstances did not warrant the police asking for the man’s personal identity number, much less conducting a register search. While the investigation is insufficient for the Parliamentary Ombudsman to state whether the matter involved a violation of the protection against searches of homes afforded by the Instrument of Government (1974:152), in his assessment it is a borderline case.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman holds that if crime prevention and outreach activities are to be conducted by seeking out people in their homes, this ought to place considerable demands on the responsiveness and behaviour of police officers. Otherwise, there is a risk that it could be construed as harassment or unjustified intrusion into the private sphere, which may damage confidence in the Swedish Police Authority. The police officers are criticised for failing to live up to the requirements of the Police Ordinance (2014:1104) concerning how a police officer is to behave in contact with the public.