Latest decision summaries

  • Date of Decision:9/23/2020 Decision Case Number:1587-2019

    The Parliamentary Ombudsman directs criticism towards the Prison and Probation Service, Fosie prison, for neglecting to inform that a telephone conversation was monitored by staff

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:9/7/2020 Decision Case Number:4141-2018

    Statements regarding the statutory obligations on objectivity and impartiality due to the National Board of Health and Welfare’s national guidelines on care for patients with depression or anxiety

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:9/3/2020 Decision Case Number:O 13-2020

    The National Board of Institutional Care’s measures due to covid-19

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:8/31/2020 Decision Case Number:7480-2019

    The Parliamentary Ombudsman directs criticism towards the manager of human resources in Laholm municipality for the management of a request to disclose public documents

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:7/22/2020 Decision Case Number:6705-2019

    Complaint against the Prison and Probation Service, Brinkeberg prison, regarding deviancies in connection to the management of a urine sample, and statements regarding the documentation of such a sample

    Hide information

    Summary

    An intern at a prison, who had left an urine sample, handed in a complaint to the Parliamentary Ombudsmen regarding the fact that he was not allowed to be present when his urine was transferred to a test tube marked with his personal data. Pursuant to the prison’s routines regarding drug tests an intern shall be in close proximity to witness that the test is carried out adequately, if not, due to security reasons, it is more suitable for the staff to manage the procedure on their own. The prison did not complete any documentation regarding the intern’s presence during the course of the urine sample.

    The Parliamentary Ombudsman notes that a positive test may result in an official warning pursuant to the Imprisonment Act and so forth lead to restrictions during the execution of the sentence. An intern is able to request a review of an official warning and at a later stage appeal the decision to an administrative court. Therefore, the Parliamentary Ombudsman suggests that it is in accordance to the rule of law, that the Prison and Probation Service should set up documentation regarding an intern’s presence during the authority’s management of an urine sample, or an intern’s possibility to be present.

  • Date of Decision:7/1/2020 Decision Case Number:8498-2018

    The Parliamentary Ombudsman directs severe criticism towards the Emergency Service, region west, for slow processing of licences to handle flammable goods

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:6/30/2020 Decision Case Number:8911-2019

    Body searches and house searches in vehicles, pursuant to the Police Act, to search for weapons and other dangerous objects for crime prevention purposes (II)

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:6/30/2020 Decision Case Number:6855-2018

    Body searches and house searches in vehicles, pursuant to the Police Act, to search for weapons and other dangerous objects for crime prevention purposes (I)

    Read more
Search