Criticism of the Administrative Court in Malmö for its slow and passive processing of a case concerning unemployment benefit. Also a statement on the court’s processing time for so-called public cases in general

Summary of the decision: The Parliamentary Ombudsmen have criticised the Administrative Court in Malmö for its slow processing of so-called public cases in a number of earlier decisions. In the most recent review in November 2023, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman noted that the Administrative Court was continuing to take measures to reduce processing times but that several categories of case – particularly those involving social insurance – still generally had long processing times, and that this remained a concern.

In this decision, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman directs renewed criticism at the Administrative Court for its slow and passive processing of a case concerning unemployment benefit. The processing time was just under 16 months and the Administrative Court took no active processing measures during a period of around 12 months.

The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman notes that turnaround times in general have improved since his last review, something he takes a positive view of. That said, the processing times reported by the Administrative Court are still too long in certain categories of case. The Administrative Court has reported that the court has faced challenges related to, among other things, lack of financial resources and staff provision for many years. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman holds that when resources – human resources, for example – are inadequate, the onus is on the chief judge to in the first instance review the organisation and make the necessary changes to better cope with the situation that has arisen. The court’s report also reveals that, since his appointment, the chief judge has implemented several organisational changes intended to, among other things, increase the court’s productivity. It is also apparent that the court has taken measures to obtain additional resources and strengthen its workforce. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman welcomes the measures that have been taken and the court’s ongoing active efforts to shorten processing times.

However, even taking into account the improvements that have been made, it is worrying that processing times in several categories of case – particularly those involving social insurance – are still too long. In addition, there are the challenges that the court has reported, including lack of resources. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman therefore once again underlines the importance of continuing the work of shortening processing times and decreasing the backlog of cases, and of continuously following up the results.

Copies of the decision have been sent to the Government and the Swedish National Courts Administration for information purposes.