Response to interpellation 2022/23:405 on children who have been subjected to serious crimes

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! Sanna Backeskog has asked me what measures the government intends to take to ensure that children who have been subjected to serious crimes have their rights met, particularly regarding the statutory investigation period. She has also asked what measures the government intends to take to counter the regional differences that exist regarding the application of the law for children who have been subjected to crimes.

The government is now restructuring the criminal justice policy and strengthening the perspective of crime victims throughout the entire justice system. Those who have been subjected to crime should always be able to count on support from society. This is, of course, particularly important when it concerns children. When crimes against children are investigated, it must be done with special consideration for the children's vulnerable situation. Therefore, as a general rule, prosecutors with special competence handle these investigations. Close cooperation with, among others, the police, healthcare, and social services also takes place in the children's houses that now exist in most locations in the country where prosecutor's offices are located.

Of course, statutory investigation times must be upheld, and children who have been subjected to crimes shall meet a uniform application of the law and receive support from society, regardless of where in the country the child lives or the crime was committed. That the statutory investigation time is nevertheless exceeded can have various causes. There may be an interest in trying to shed light on them, so that the right way forward can be found when it comes to solving the problems.

One reason may be that the crimes children are exposed to in several respects have become more complex to investigate. This applies in particular to internet-related sexual offenses. The influx of suspected crimes against children has also increased steadily over recent years. Between 2021 and 2022 alone, the influx increased by 10 percent. On July 1, 2021, an entirely new crime was also introduced, child peace crime (barnfridsbrott). During 2022, just over 40,000 suspected crimes concerning crimes against children were received. Of these, nearly a quarter concerned the new crime, child peace crime.

Another reason why the statutory investigation period is exceeded can be that the investigating authorities have insufficient resources and tools in relation to their mandate. As part of the major reorganization of Swedish justice policy, the government is currently carrying out very extensive work to strengthen both the Swedish Police Authority and the Prosecution Authority. The reinforcements involve both large economic resource additions and new and important tools. The initiative to increase the number of employees within the Swedish Police Authority by a total of 10,000 people by 2024 continues as a basis for the strengthened and developed police operations. Furthermore, thanks to increased appropriations, the Prosecution Authority has been able to recruit and train more prosecutors. The number of prosecutors has increased significantly, from approximately 990 prosecutors in 2019 to today's approximately 1,200 prosecutors.

I share the questioner's view that the regional differences regarding investigations of crimes against children are very concerning. A special investigator has recently submitted proposals for a national strategy which, among other things, aims to ensure a uniform application across the country regarding the response to and protection of children, but also access to children's homes and child interviewers. The proposals are now out for consultation, and the responses are expected by the beginning of August.

The government has placed and will continue to place a great focus on issues concerning crime victims during the coming years. This applies in particular to children who have been exposed to serious crime.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister of Justice, for the answer! When I enter this interpellation debate on children who have been subjected to serious crimes, I do not do so to seek conflict or polarization or to win political points. I do it for the children – our children, all children who are everyone's children. And I do not doubt that I and my party and the Minister of Justice and his party have the same goal in this issue: that no child in Sweden should have to be subjected to crime. But when it still happens, society's collective resources must be there to monitor the child's rights and ensure protection, support, and redress. That is why I have this interpellation debate today.

I am thinking of the children who grow up with gang crime in the family or nearby. We must also not forget the children who are controlled and subjected to honor oppression. And we must not forget all those children who today all around our country, from all social groups and all cultures, in the most expensive luxury villas or the most worn-out rental apartments, are subjected to serious crimes in the place where they should be safest: at home.

Two weeks ago, Save the Children released a report on children who have been subjected to serious crimes. According to the law, the police and prosecutors are to investigate serious crimes against children within 90 days. But many children have to wait significantly longer than that. The report shows that every third child has had to wait more than 90 days for a decision on prosecution. Furthermore, the development is heading in the wrong direction.

This has serious consequences for the children. Rädda Barnen has noted several cases where long investigation times have stood in the way of help such as support calls and trauma treatment from child and adolescent psychiatry that the child needs and is entitled to. The children can be forced to wait for interventions from social services, which in turn can mean that the home environment becomes directly dangerous, for example if the suspected perpetrator is a parent the child lives with. In cases where the perpetrator is a relative of the child, the risk of anxiety is particularly great. The risk of suicide is elevated.

It is also common for the child to begin to doubt themselves and whether they were not at fault for being subjected to it. It can mean that the child loses trust in the adult world and in the justice system. If the investigation then does not lead to prosecution, we risk that the child will not dare to tell if they are subjected to a crime again.

An important principle in a democratic and rule-of-law country is, as the Minister for Justice said, that it should not matter who you are or where in the country you live. You as a crime victim should have equal rights as everyone else who has been subjected to crime. This should particularly apply to children, who may have difficulty advocating for themselves and possessing knowledge about the legal system and their own rights. Despite this, Save the Children's report shows that the regional differences are large. This applies to both how well the deadline is met and what proportion of the crimes are prosecuted.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child also points out municipal and regional differences for children exposed to crime in the justice system as an area where Sweden must take measures for equal treatment.

Madam Speaker! It is clear that more must be done so that children who have been subjected to serious crimes receive the protection, the support, and the redress they are entitled to. Children who have been subjected to a serious crime should not also be betrayed by society through an all-too-long wait and a protracted process.

A system where children who are subjected to serious crimes are handled differently depending on where in the country they live cannot be accepted. I am pleased that the Minister of Justice shares my view. I would then like to ask the Minister of Justice: When can we expect to see any change?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! Let me again confirm the importance of the question that Sanna Backeskog raises. Today we have discussed various aspects of the victim's position in the legal process. This is an extraordinarily important part of that. Earlier today we discussed children's opportunities to have their voices heard or to have their rights met in various disputes. Then it was about custody disputes and other such issues. But now it is about when children have been subjected to crimes.

Let me mention a few things that I believe are very significant for addressing the problems. First, it is about understanding why differences arise between different parts of the country and for that part also generally. I can see a difficulty in meeting the time limits we have set regarding children in light of the fact that they are particularly vulnerable.

One such factor is, as mentioned, the nature of the crime. I think the introduction of the new child peace crime was welcome. It is, in turn, linked to another crime, namely that one, for example, sees a father hit a mother or something similar. Then we can see that the investigation times for the child peace crime are connected to how long it takes to investigate the crime that, so to speak, occurs between adults.

There are a number of such factors that may explain some of the problems, even if they do not explain the entire issue. In that case, one must look at how one practically works with these issues.

When I delve into this, I can find at least a couple or three concrete issues that we from the government's side must follow up on with the police and prosecutors. One such issue concerns the fact that law enforcement authorities have developed methods for working with children who are victims of crime in investigations. Even though this is the result of a method development that has occurred broadly and jointly within the authorities, it has likely gained traction to varying degrees in different parts of the country. It is such an issue that we must follow up on.

Another is, naturally, this with resources, not least in regions where, for example, gang shootings and other serious violent crime take up a lot of resources. There, it can be the case that it takes resources that could have been used to investigate crimes where children are victims. There is also, in some parts of the country, a shortage of child interviewers, which could be such a factor.

This is about methodology, how one works with these issues in different parts of the country, but it is naturally also about resource allocation. From the government's side, I want to say two things there.

One thing is that the resource allocation, the resource growth, when it concerns the entire justice system, will need to continue during the coming years, not only to meet the challenges from serious organized crime but also so that there are resources to take care of other important crime, not least that which we are talking about today.

The second thing is that we, from the government's side, in authority dialogue with relevant authorities and in other ways, can follow up on the issues that I am now highlighting. It concerns methodological issues, resource issues, the availability of child interviewers, and how one works methodically to address the regional differences that obviously exist and which are not acceptable.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Madam Speaker! One of the reasons mentioned for the long processing times and the regional differences is that there is a shortage of experienced child investigators and child interviewers in some police areas and in some parts of the country. Likewise, it is the case with children's houses. They are in more and more places in the country, but it is still not comprehensive.

Children's houses, where the justice system, healthcare, and social services can gather around the child, instead of the child being moved around and telling their story time and again, should be a right for every child who has been subjected to a crime.

I particularly want to address the lack of competence that both Save the Children and other children's rights organizations, as well as our women's shelters and crime victim support centers, have highlighted for a long time. Working with children who have been subjected to crimes requires experience, competence, warmth, and evidence-based working methods. If the case involves children who have been subjected to grooming and abuse over the internet, knowledge of children's language online is also required. In Save the Children's report, the importance is pointed out that the child interviewer can follow the narrative when the child talks about adda and ghosta or reels and stories. If one lacks knowledge about children's digital reality, the child notices it and can lose trust, which hinders the entire narrative.

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats and the Moderates talk a lot about their paradigm shift, but it is not enough to just introduce increased penalties. It is too simple a measure. It leads, on the one hand, to full prisons and worse conditions for working on recidivism prevention, and on the other hand, to long waiting times for the execution of sentences. And it is not to the benefit of the crime victim.

For many crime victims, there are other values that are at least equally important. What the vast majority of crime victims probably wish for most is that they had not been subjected to a crime at all. The value of crime prevention work cannot be overestimated. Once one has been subjected to a crime, one must receive the help and support that is required. If the government is serious about the crime victim perspective, it is necessary to ensure that knowledge, resources, and capacity are increased both among the police and prosecutors as well as in social services and healthcare.

Madam Speaker! Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to urge the Minister, the Government, and the Sweden Democrats to heed the demands of Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner and allocate more resources to the welfare system. It is indeed in the municipalities where the most important crime prevention work takes place.

I view seriously the risk that the work for children's rights on a broad front must completely come to a standstill in favor of unilaterally repressive measures.

Madam Speaker! I would therefore like to ask the Minister for Justice how he views the municipalities' possibilities to work on crime prevention now when resources obviously are not sufficient. I also wonder how the Minister for Justice intends to act so that the right competence is in the right place, so that children who have been subjected to serious crimes can receive support, protection, and redress.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! Let me first say something about the question raised in the interpellation, the question of children's position in the legal process when they have been subjected to serious crimes. There, I would still like to point out two clear things that the government can do.

One thing is to ensure that the resource allocation of the entire justice system - police, prosecutors and also otherwise - continues and that the growth will be secured in terms of resources also during the coming years.

The second thing is to follow up on the more concrete aspects that we have touched upon here in direct dialogue with, not least, the police authority and the prosecution authority. This concerns methodological issues, the lack of child interviewers, and other issues that are more about how one works with these issues within the framework of the authorities.

I also want to point out an investigation that we have now received. It is a report that aims precisely at a national strategy to prevent and combat violence against children. It addresses many of these issues. This concerns, in particular, what measures must be taken to ensure better equality in terms of how children are treated as crime victims in different parts of the country. We are now working with this basis and will return with concrete conclusions.

Then I shall broaden the discussion to the crime prevention work. It is clear that it is a somewhat easy, shall we say, debate point to set the criminal law against crime prevention. To begin with, I argue that punishment has a very important crime-preventive effect, that is to say, sufficiently clear punishments have a crime-preventive effect. They do not necessarily have a recidivism-preventing effect but absolutely a preventive effect.

Crime clearance is perhaps not something that normally falls under the umbrella of crime prevention, but we know that the risk of being caught when committing a crime has a very crime-preventing effect. A very large amount of what is sometimes somewhat unilaterally described as the repressive side of policy also has an extraordinarily important crime-preventing function.

But with that said, I also dare to assert that the intersection between social and legal measures is always significant. It has probably never been as significant as it is today. This applies in particular if we are talking about the socialization of children and young people into criminal gangs by serious organized crime. I believe that a major reconsideration across the board will be required, where the social measures and the legal measures must be integrated in a completely different way than today.

I have, for example, lifted the 15-year limit, which permeates our legislation and which is very problematic both for social services and for the law enforcement authorities. The law enforcement authorities cannot provide a sufficiently clear consequence for children under 15 who commit serious crimes. One is not allowed to use secret coercive measures in the way that is necessary if one is to solve crimes. Social services are not allowed to implement open interventions against children under 15 if the parents are not involved. This is something that we are now changing from July 1. It is extraordinarily important.

It is a number of different legislative issues. It concerns the confidentiality issues, which fundamentally are about removing confidentiality barriers between the police, social services, and school so that they can share the information they hold and jointly tackle the problems. There are a number of different issues where it is absolutely necessary to integrate the traditionally crime-fighting with the traditionally crime-preventing, not least so that we can both protect children and save children from serious crime.

My speaking time has just run out, but I promise to start the next contribution by commenting on the economic resources.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Madam Speaker! When the Social Democrats were in government, we took several important steps, appreciated by children's rights organizations, to strengthen children's rights and opportunities. We increased the funding for crime victim and women's shelters, which perform life-saving interventions for women and children exposed to violence. We introduced Lex Lilla hjärtat to strengthen children's rights in family home placements. We also introduced the specific child peace crime, which means that it is now a criminal offense to expose a child to witnessing a crime in a close relationship. One of our proudest days was when the Riksdag voted yes to our proposal that the Convention on the Rights of the Child should become Swedish law.

But this is obviously not enough. Children's rights must be constantly monitored and strengthened. I think it is high time to take more steps. Children who have been subjected to serious crimes should not be let down once again. We want children's houses to exist in the whole country. We want to see a unified crime victim law that clarifies and strengthens crime victims' rights, and that crime victim law should extra clearly take into account children's particularly vulnerable position. There, I hope for cooperation between us.

Save the Children's report shows with all desired clarity that children who are subjected to serious crimes need better support. The statutory times for investigation must be upheld, and the quality must be high across the entire country. Resources are also needed for municipalities and regions, so that the children can receive the support and help they need.

I would like to thank the Minister for Justice for an important debate. Our children, all children who are everyone's children, deserve society's collective resources for a secure present and future.

I take this opportunity to wish everyone a pleasant summer.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Sanna Backeskog for the opportunity to discuss these important issues today.

I confirm that important things were done during the last parliamentary term and that there is much left to do before we have reached a point where we can say, in good conscience, that we have done everything required to protect crime victims in general and, not least, children who have been subjected to crime.

Let me say something about the concrete issue that Sanna Backeskog has raised today. I will return to the importance of children who are subjected to crime being met with special resources, special expertise, special experience, and with respect for time. Time is a particularly significant factor when it concerns children who in different ways are subjects of legal proceedings. It is extraordinarily important to staff and resource law enforcement agencies in such a way that they can prioritize the children and follow up on the important aspects we have discussed today.

This is about everything from methodological issues to the lack of child interviewers and other specialist expertise, and about ensuring that in the competition between different types of serious crime, the crime that affects children is prioritized in an appropriate and necessary way. That work is extraordinarily important to continue.

Today's exchange is a good starting point - if not a starting point, then at least a stop along the way - for that work. I look forward to interacting with all parties in the Riksdag in the important work ahead.

I acknowledge the greeting regarding a fine summer.

The interpellation debate was hereby concluded.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)