Decisions
The result of an investigation by a Parliamentary Ombudsman is documented in a decision or protocol.
The decisions or protocols include statements by Parliamentary Ombudsmen that clarify whether the public authority concerned has acted in accordance with the law or not. If the public authority has acted incorrectly, the ombudsman will issue criticism that may be directed against the authority as well as an individual public official. Of all complaints filed each year, about 10 per cent are concluded with some form of criticism. The ombudsmen may also conduct investigations on their own initiative – in other words enquiries may be started even if no complaint has been filed.
The ombudsmen’s decisions are not legally binding, which means that the public authority does not officially have to comply with the ombudsmen’s criticism. In practice however, this is almost always the case. Public authorities benefit from the opinions issued by the ombudsmen, the opinions are often used to improve an authority’s internal procedures and rules.
The media also takes great interest in the ombudsmen’s decisions. The media continuously monitors the ombudsmen’s work.
Published decisions
Criticism of Värmland District Court for deficiencies in the handling of a custody case
Go to decision about Criticism of Värmland District Court for deficiencies in the handling of a custody caseConcerning a chief guardian’s obligation to obtain doctor’s certificates and make other inquiries in actions to end administration etc.
Go to decision about Concerning a chief guardian’s obligation to obtain doctor’s certificates and make other inquiries in actions to end administration etc.The Social Welfare Committee in Härryda Municipality is criticised for failing to submit a request for public defence counsel to the administrative court
Go to decision about The Social Welfare Committee in Härryda Municipality is criticised for failing to submit a request for public defence counsel to the administrative courtCriticism of the Social Welfare Committee in Borgholm Municipality for failing to implement the intervention personal assistance to the extent the individual was entitled
Go to decision about Criticism of the Social Welfare Committee in Borgholm Municipality for failing to implement the intervention personal assistance to the extent the individual was entitledCriticism of Uppsala University Hospital, Region Uppsala, for conducting routine body searches of patients without legal grounds
Go to decision about Criticism of Uppsala University Hospital, Region Uppsala, for conducting routine body searches of patients without legal groundsHässelby-Vällingby City District Committee in the City of Stockholms is severely criticised for shortcomings in the processing of two judgements in cases related to the Act on Support and Service for Persons with Certain Functional Impairments
Go to decision about Hässelby-Vällingby City District Committee in the City of Stockholms is severely criticised for shortcomings in the processing of two judgements in cases related to the Act on Support and Service for Persons with Certain Functional ImpairmentsCriticism of the Swedish Police Authority for refusing to allow a defence counsel to visit clients in a custody suite
Go to decision about Criticism of the Swedish Police Authority for refusing to allow a defence counsel to visit clients in a custody suiteCriticism of Västra Götaland Region for the delay in admitting a patient pursuant to the second paragraph of Section 7 of the Forensic Psychiatric Care Act (SFS 1991:1129). Also criticism of the Swedish Prison and Probation Service
Go to decision about Criticism of Västra Götaland Region for the delay in admitting a patient pursuant to the second paragraph of Section 7 of the Forensic Psychiatric Care Act (SFS 1991:1129). Also criticism of the Swedish Prison and Probation ServiceCriticism of the Swedish Prison and Probation Service, Mariefred Prison, for forcing an inmate to use a catheter to provide a urine sample
Go to decision about Criticism of the Swedish Prison and Probation Service, Mariefred Prison, for forcing an inmate to use a catheter to provide a urine sampleAnnual reports
Last updated at 2024-03-05