https://www.jo.se/feed/latest-decisions The latest decision summaries published at www.jo.se en https://www.jo.se/en/decision/criticism-of-the-swedish-tax-agency-for-issuing-a-death-certificate-containing-inaccurate-information-and-for-procedural-shortcomings/ 2026-11-03 16:05:44 Summary of the decision: The Swedish Tax Agency issued a death certificate on which people were incorrectly listed as children of the deceased. When the Swedish Tax Agency registers a death in the Population Register, as a matter of procedure, the agency will check to make sure that the relatives stated in the deceased’s relatives report are correct. As far as has been ascertained in investigating this matter, this check is one way for the Swedish Tax Agency to correct any errors in the registration of relatives that may have arisen when the agency took over the Population Register from the Church of Sweden. According to the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman, it is therefore vital that these checks are thorough. Issuing inaccurate information can have serious consequences, both given that the information may be subject to secrecy and because it may be a difficult experience for other reasons for an individual to receive information on a relative’s death certificate that turns out to be incorrect. In this case, the complainant received a death certificate with an inaccurate relatives report because the information in the Population Register was incorrect. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman notes that it is a serious matter that the Swedish Tax Agency issued incorrect information. The Swedish Tax Agency corrected the deceased’s relatives report on two different occasions, removing persons who were wrongly listed. It is a procedural error on the part of the Swedish Tax Agency that, when correcting one error, it failed to check whether the other person who was unknown to the complainant should rightfully have been listed. The Swedish Tax Agency is criticised for issuing a death certificate containing inaccurate information, and for procedural shortcomings. https://www.jo.se/en/decision/criticism-of-a-school-for-the-formulation-of-its-code-of-conduct-concerning-body-searches/ 2026-11-03 16:09:04 Summary of the decision: A school had formulated its code of conduct in a manner that gave the impression that pupils and parents were expected to consent to, among other things, searches of bags and other items that pupils had with them, i.e., body searches. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman notes that schools are only permitted to conduct such searches and confiscate items that are found if the criteria described in Sections 5 and 7 of Chapter 6 a of the Swedish Education Act (SFS 2010:800) are fulfilled, and that it is not possible to waive constitutional protection against coercive measures such as body searches by giving consent. Even if it was not the school’s intention to obtain consent for the measures in question, the code of conduct could be construed in this way, hence the school cannot avoid criticism for its formulation. https://www.jo.se/en/decision/concerning-the-possibility-for-inmates-to-possess-and-use-stamps-that-have-been-sent-to-them-also-criticism-of-the-swedish-prison-and-probation-service-hall-prison-for-giving-the-distinct-impressio/ 2026-11-03 15:54:01 Summary of the decision: During 2024, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen received a number of complaints that Hall Prison had prohibited inmates from having stamps sent to them by post in their possession. In dealing with these complaints, among other things the investigation obtained the written information circulated to inmates regarding this procedure. The matter has since been reviewed. In her decision, the Parliamentary Ombudsman criticises Hall Prison for the information provided to the inmates in question. She also discusses what would be required for an assessment of whether an inmate should be permitted to have something in their possession to be considered individual in any meaningful sense. Given the facts that have come to the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s attention, she underlines the urgency of the prison reviewing its procedures regarding the use stamps by inmates at the earliest possible opportunity. https://www.jo.se/en/decision/criticism-of-the-swedish-prison-and-probation-service-beateberg-prison-because-an-inmate-was-deemed-to-have-breached-regulations-by-expressing-dissatisfaction-with-slow-processing-also-general-stat/ 2026-11-03 16:07:20 Summary of the decision: An inmate was reported for attempting to exert undue influence because, in a request to possess tax returns in his cell, he wrote that he would like the request to be processed “without delay,” that “I expect prompt action,” and “improvement”. It appears that he had submitted the same request twice without receiving any response. The prison determined that the inmate had breached regulations and conditions on enforcement, as by formulating his request in this way he had attempted to influence the work of prison officers. The Parliamentary Ombudsman has previously addressed these issues and once again takes a positive view of the efforts of both the Swedish Prison and Probation Service in general and individual facilities to address undue influence. She emphasises that it is equally self-evident that prison officers should not need to tolerate such intimidation as that inmates must be able to, for example, express their dissatisfaction or make requests concerning the processing of a matter without this automatically being treated as undue. While the reported misconduct did not result in a warning, it may have direct consequences for the inmate. Any assessment of whether a given action constitutes a breach of regulations must therefore be characterised by objectivity, common sense and respect. In the present case, the Parliamentary Ombudsman finds that there was clearly no attempt to exert undue, or unlawful, influence. Characterising the inmate’s action as undue also strikes her as a gross exaggeration. The prison is criticised for its processing. https://www.jo.se/en/decision/criticism-of-gavle-district-court-for-deficient-and-slow-processing-of-a-civil-case/ 2026-11-03 16:08:10 Summary of the decision: Gävle District Court has been suffering from a shortage of judges. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman has reviewed proceedings in two civil actions brought before the district court. In one of the cases, the scheduled main hearing was postponed due to a shortage of judges. The case then remained pending for seven months before a new date was set for the main hearing. By the time the case was adjudicated, it had been ongoing for around one year and two months. In his decision, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman makes certain statements concerning a court’s obligations prior to and after the postponement of a hearing. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman finds it deeply concerning that main hearings are postponed due to staff shortages. While he notes that the subsequent delay in rescheduling the hearing delayed proceedings, he finds no reason to criticise the district court in this case. In the other civil case, the total processing time was around three years and three months. During this period, the district court held three preparatory hearings and postponed two main hearings. There was also a period of nine months during which it appears that no procedural measures were taken. In the assessment of the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman, the district court failed in its duty to proceed with preparations with the aim of swiftly adjudicating the case. The district court is criticised for this deficient and slow processing. The chief judge is also criticised for failing to act to ensure that the case was adjudicated with the required swiftness.