Response to interpellation 2023/24:806 on the possibility for women facing violence to retain their housing

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! Laila Naraghi has asked the Minister for Infrastructure and Housing what measures he intends to take within his areas of responsibility so that a person who has been subjected to a crime in a close relationship and who, given the difficulties of arranging a new home, may have an extra strong need to be able to retain the housing that has been the couple's joint home upon a separation, regardless of the form of housing. The interpellation has been handed over to me.

The government is working on a broad front against violence and violations in close relationships, particularly regarding men's violence against women. On July 1, 2024, the legislative changes that Laila Naraghi raises in her question will enter into force. Through these, the housing law protection for victims of violence is strengthened so that the person who commits violence against a close relative can be deprived of their apartment, while the victim of violence gets better opportunities to take over the rental contract and stay. It is the perpetrators who will need to move, not the crime victims.

It is obviously important that those who are victims of violence who do not live in rental apartments should also have the right to a safe home. When it comes to the question of which measures are needed regarding other forms of housing, it must however be considered that there are large differences in the regulatory frameworks. The legislative changes in the area of rental law concern what conditions shall apply for a landlord to have to accept someone who wants to take over a rental contract as a tenant. Someone who has been subjected to a crime now gets better opportunities for that. The specific problem that these legislative changes aim at has no equivalent in the rules for condominiums or owned homes. For someone to be able to take over, for example, a condominium or a villa, a number of questions of an economic nature are raised that must be handled.

In a separation, there are rules regarding the division of property in the Marriage Code and the Cohabitation Act (2003:376). It is important that the procedure for property divisions functions well. Protracted division processes mean that it takes longer until the property, for example a shared residence, is distributed. Even though there are possibilities for a court to decide who shall have the right to remain in a shared residence for a limited period, protracted processes can cause problems.

During 2024, the government intends to appoint an inquiry to review the rules on division of property in order to ensure a well-functioning, efficient, and legally secure order. The regulatory framework must not be exploitable by a violent partner for the purpose of delaying the division of property process and thereby deterring someone from leaving a relationship.

The government is also taking a number of other measures in the area. Among these can be mentioned the funding of state grants aimed at strengthening and developing the municipalities' work in the long term when they offer victims of violence help with arranging permanent housing.

Furthermore, the Gender Equality Authority has been tasked with analyzing the housing market from a gender equality perspective. This includes monitoring and analyzing the distribution between women and men regarding ownership and the value of properties and providing proposals for information initiatives to reduce economic inequality. The assignment shall be final-reported by May 31, 2025, at the latest.

The government has also recently decided on a new action program to ensure coordinated, long-term and effective work to prevent and combat men's violence against women, violence in close relationships and honor-related violence and oppression. The program shall apply for 2024-2026.

Men's violence against women is a serious societal problem that we can never accept. Ultimately, it is about everyone who lives in our country having the same right to freedom and safety.

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

Laila Naraghi (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Justice for the answer.

The most dangerous place for women in Sweden today is the home. There, women are tormented, raped, and murdered year-round. When a woman succeeds in separating from a violent man, society must be there, and so must the law. The law must be on the side of the woman subjected to violence, not on the side of the perpetrator and the perpetrator of violence. An important piece of the puzzle to be able to leave a violent relationship is to secure an arranged housing situation, and that is often very difficult for a woman subjected to violence.

When we Social Democrats were in government, we therefore took up this issue, along with a long series of other issues concerning men's violence against women. Just regarding the housing issue, we started as a first step the work of changing the Rent Act so that women subjected to violence can retain their rental contracts and the perpetrator moves out. We commissioned an inquiry, which produced a concrete legislative proposal. Our goal was clear: It is obvious that the woman should remain in the shared home and the perpetrator should move out.

It was the former Minister for Justice, Morgan Johansson, who gave the head of the Justice Department and subsequently the Chief State Counsel, Magnus Hermansson, the assignment to investigate specifically a strengthened tenancy law protection for women subjected to violence. This assignment was then reported to Gunnar Strömmer when he took office as Minister for Justice. As he knows, we Social Democrats here in the Riksdag have, in both motions and written questions, alerted him to this investigation and pressed for it to be implemented into law. It is good that the government has presented a concrete legislative proposal on this to the Riksdag and that we can agree on this, and it is a testament to the strength of Sweden's work against men's violence against women that prepared legislative changes can be implemented even if a change of government has occurred. Recently, the Riksdag also made a decision on this legislative change, and it will enter into force in one week, on July 1. It is a victory for justice and common sense and against violence.

Madam Speaker! As the Minister for Justice is aware, the law change applies only to women living in rental housing, as this legislation concerns the rental housing regulations. It was a first step we Social Democrats took in government, and now Social Democrats and Moderates have jointly, with this law, achieved a broad parliamentary consensus on the principle that the woman subjected to violence should be able to stay and that the man committing the violence should move out.

Now it is a matter of taking the next step, because obviously this principle shall apply to all women subjected to violence and all men committing violence regardless of housing form. The next step should therefore reasonably be to appoint an inquiry that reviews the condominium act and the regulation that applies to the eviction of condominium owners. Condominium owners can also be evicted. A condominium can be forfeited in various situations, for example if one does not pay their fee, disturbs their neighbors, or neglects the apartment. Here there is a rule system that is not identical but equivalent to that for rental apartments when a condominium is forfeited. Obviously, it should therefore be possible to make corresponding additions or amendments to the condominium act as in the rental housing regulation in order to strengthen the ability of those subjected to violence to keep their housing.

It cannot be that the Minister for Justice and the government mean that the law should distinguish how serious it is when a man commits violence against a woman in the home depending on whether the home is a rental apartment or a condominium. That would be bizarre. Surely the principles of society and the law regarding violence in the home must apply regardless of the form of housing. This should at least be investigated, just as was done when it concerned the rental law regulation.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Laila Naraghi for the opportunity to discuss these important issues today.

There is no doubt whatsoever that men's violence against women is one of society's greatest and, worse, ongoing failures. The legislation and the preventive measures to counteract this type of violence and abuse have been far too weak. Therefore, it is for me a pleasure and important to be part of a context where we, across the board, move the positions forward in this area.

Now we are discussing the tenancy law conditions for evicting the man who commits violence and transferring the contract to the woman who has been subjected to violence. Let me place this in the context of other measures concerning the protection of the home. For example, we envision a major reform of the restraining order legislation, which is fundamentally intended to protect the home as a safe place. But now it is not about protecting only the home, but about expanding the legislation to also apply to larger geographical areas. The point is that a woman who has been subjected to violence should be able to live a free and normal life, and therefore the regulations must cover not only the home but also, for example, the workplace or other parts of the locality where one lives and moves, perhaps the entire municipality.

All of this should be seen as a context. My home is my castle, and here I should be most secure. Fundamentally, it is about designing legislation that ensures the freedom and security of the woman subjected to violence is protected and that the freedom of movement of the man committing the violence is restricted. It is important to say that.

It also means that when we approach other forms of housing, it is not an expression of a relativization of the problem's significance, but an insight into the fact that we are entering entirely different regulatory frameworks. The rental law aspect is, in that sense, quite simple. It is about what requirements can be imposed and what possibilities can be given to a landlord when it comes to disposing of the housing versus what is stated in the rental contract.

When it comes to condominiums or, for that matter, terraced houses or villas owned jointly, other sets of rules apply. It is about owning the residence or, in the case of a condominium association, owning a share in the association. This means that in a division of property, for example, a rental apartment is not included, but it is, on the other hand, a residence that constitutes an asset. It is therefore rules on division of property and other matters that come into play.

In this context, I want to highlight an initiative that we have taken in a matter that has been debated for decades and which concerns property divisions, how these can be streamlined and how that type of issue should be handled. To begin with, property division should not be used as a tool for the economically stronger party to pressure the economically weaker party, who is often the woman and, unfortunately, in many cases also a woman exposed to violence.

I think the investigation into this is a good start, as it goes straight into the regulatory frameworks that cover, for example, ownership of a dwelling or ownership with a share in a housing cooperative, which is something other than the rental law.

I think we are now taking important steps to broaden the scope of the question, but we do so with full awareness that different types of housing involve different types of regulations and thus also different opportunities to address the important issue that Laila Naraghi raises.

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

Laila Naraghi (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister of Justice, for the answer!

I believe that the Minister for Justice knows that we Social Democrats in the Committee on Civil Affairs have appreciated the contact that has existed regarding various civil law issues and domestic violence. I have even invited the Minister for Justice to my home municipality, Oskarshamn, where Social Democrats and Moderates govern together.

With this as a starting point and based on the principles we are talking about here – that one should be spared violence and be allowed to live in freedom – I hope that we will be able to take important steps forward also in this matter.

With this said, Madam Speaker, I assume that what the Minister for Justice says is what applies regarding the government's policy. In a response to a written question in April last year, the Minister for Justice said this to me: "Laila Naraghi has asked me how I and the government intend to act to enable women exposed to violence to remain in the home and to ensure that it is the perpetrator who must move out. Men's violence against women shall be combated with full force. The work against men's violence against women is a priority issue for the government and it includes measures to help the women and children who are exposed to violence. Here, the possibility of remaining in a shared residence is an important part." After that, he wrote a paragraph about the commission's proposal on changed rental law regulation.

Madam Speaker! It is not reasonable that a woman who is subjected to violence by a partner should risk being forced to break away from her familiar environment and leave her home. These are the Justice Minister's own words. They are good words, but they cannot only apply to women subjected to violence in rental housing.

The question that arises is: Is the only thing you in the government want to do in this area an initiative that we Social Democrats took in government and which you then followed up on, which was very good?

The Minister also mentioned the issue of housing division, which is also a result of an announcement proposed by the Committee on Civil Affairs on the initiative of us Social Democrats. We received a majority in the committee, which then resulted in a common position of all parties, which was very good.

It is of course excellent that the government continues to work on both of these matters and takes the issues forward, improves and develops them in a large government office, precisely as a government office should work, also on the mandate of the Riksdag. But is it really the case that it is required that we Social Democrats tell the government what should be done, for the government to create changes in this area, so that women exposed to violence can get a good housing situation?

Madam Speaker! The Minister for Justice has not been the only one in the government who has spoken in general terms about the home and the household and about the possibility for women subjected to violence to remain there, the Minister for Equality has also done so. When she spoke about this at a press conference during the spring, she said that we must have a regulatory framework that both makes it possible to stop the home from being used as a crime scene, and also strengthens the possibility for victims of crime to retain the home for their own part. I repeat: a regulatory framework that strengthens the possibility for victims of crime to retain the home.

When I and others have listened to the government's big words and seen their proud expressions - rightly so, as these are important reforms - we assumed that the government's ambitions and goals apply to all women subjected to violence and that an additional step will be taken, reasonably for condominiums, so that violent men can also be evicted from them with the help of the law and the crime victim can remain in the home.

We do not need to discuss the exact forms for this here in the chamber. We rarely do that; instead, one identifies a problem, sees a possible way forward, and can appoint an inquiry for that. If we have now agreed that it is the woman subjected to violence who should be able to stay and that it is the perpetrator who should move, it is perfectly reasonable that this must apply to all forms of housing. Let us therefore look at how this can be done for condominiums in the next step.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! No, I am not – at least not entirely – dependent on assurances from the Social Democrats when it comes to political initiatives. I perhaps also do not have an equally pressing need to take the credit for everything I undertake, but I gladly emphasize the good cooperation that exists between us and other parties here in the Riksdag to move forward in these issues and stick to that. I am happy to share both the joy, the responsibility, and the pride over what is achieved.

I can state that there were good things for us to pick up on when we entered the Government Offices. One of these things was the investigation concerning the protection of rental housing. There were gaps in it. For example, there was a deliberate choice not to extend the responsibility for the crime committed in the apartment and the surrounding area to also include children for whom one has a responsibility. We pushed in this additional directive, and I believe that was important.

We took hold of what was available, and I have been able, with great joy and in cooperation with a broad majority in the Riksdag, to place it on the Riksdag's table. Now these important rules and the protection under the rental act enter into force.

When it comes to the reform for the division of property, an investigation should have been commissioned a long time ago. Pleasantly enough, we now receive this investigation. It will be important because we know, or at least on good grounds can assume, that the division of property is used as a means of pressure against the economically weaker party, most often the woman, in destructive relationships. It is a situation that we cannot accept. There are also, as part of the divisions of property, several of the issues we are now talking about, such as the access to what has been a common residence, a housing cooperative apartment or, for that part, a terraced house or a villa.

When it comes to condominiums, I agree with Laila Naraghi that there are similarities between the protection in the rental housing law and the protection for condominiums. I am fully aware that these are two different forms of housing.

Laila Naraghi mentioned the rules on forfeiture and that the regulations governing condominiums resemble the regulations for rental apartments. Then there are significant differences that must also be included in the calculation when it comes to ownership issues, lending issues, forced sale issues linked to the Enforcement Authority, and so on. It is not an argument for not looking closer at the issues, but they are nevertheless circumstances that should be included because they make the issue differ from the rental law, perhaps also regarding the simplicity of finding solutions.

With this said, I am prepared to continue discussing these issues. Just as Laila Naraghi, I take as a starting point that we shall do everything we can to protect women who are victims of violence and, in that regard, also other persons who are victims of violence in close relationships. Housing is a completely central issue in that equation.

I am glad that we have implemented changes to the rental housing law and that we are making progress regarding property divisions. We will, of course, continue the discussion also regarding other forms of housing, especially condominiums, where there are similarities with the rental housing law. I am fully aware of the differences.

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

Laila Naraghi (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister of Justice for these words. Words are important. Our experience as Social Democrats in the Committee on Civil Affairs is precisely that when we have had these exchanges of views, it has led forward. I appreciate it, and I have expressed that appreciation previously. It is important that we can pull in the same direction.

Madam Speaker! It is also very important, as the Minister for Justice says, that when one finds holes in proposals or legislation and has the large Government Offices at one's disposal, one can plug these. That is absolutely excellent. That is exactly how we shall work.

Since the inquiry into the issues of division of property is being raised here, I would like to take the opportunity to ask when this inquiry will be appointed. Is there any possibility of receiving further information on that?

Men's violence against women must be countered with full force. We agree on this. I perceive it as that we, regardless of the color of the government, are working on and striving forward bit by bit.

It is also a matter of working with this within civil law. As I said earlier, the most dangerous place for women is the home. There, women are tormented, raped, and murdered year-round. The deficiencies in the civil law legislation are unfortunately used by perpetrators of violence to be able to keep women in violent relationships.

When a woman finally succeeds in separating from a violent man, society must truly be there. It is then a matter of looking at all the pieces of the pie in the legislation.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats in the Committee on Civil Affairs have had much contact with the Minister for Justice regarding violence against children and domestic violence – the family law legislation. But this issue with the housing is such an important piece of the puzzle for being able to leave a violent relationship. Therefore, we truly hope that the government will take this on and appoint an inquiry to look at how we can do the same with the housing cooperative law legislation as with the rental housing law.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Laila Naraghi once again for the opportunity to raise these issues together today.

I really want to seize upon the ambition that Laila Naraghi expresses and which I truly share – the importance of us mobilizing on all fronts to address the major societal problem constituted by men who hit women, and also other violence in close relationships.

I also want to emphasize the importance of having a broad perspective when tackling this issue. I personally believe that the criminal law aspect is very significant. It is important that we do not limit ourselves only to the criminal gangs and networks, but that we also see that today's penalties, when it comes to offenses in this area, do not reflect the severity of the crimes.

It is an extraordinarily destructive order that the Prison and Probation Service is not allowed to consider the risk of recidivism as a circumstance when they are to decide whether someone should be granted parole or not. It can be an extraordinarily dangerous thing for women who have been subjected to violence by a man who is released early. The criminal law aspect is super important.

We have talked about the restraining orders, and I am sure that we will be able to build broad common majorities around this when we return to the Riksdag with the legislative proposals. I look forward to that. I am also very pleased with what we are doing in the civil law area.

Regarding the rental law matters, Laila Naraghi has asked about a time for the division of property issues. We have said that it shall take place during the year, and that is fixed. I think it is "show, don't tell", so you will find out when it comes. Also, other issues concerning custody, visitation, housing, and those that are related to children are, in practice, very significant issues for women who have been subjected to violence.

Let us pursue the common ambition and rejoice in all we do together, look at new issues and maintain the breadth when it comes to the reforms - from the punishment to the housing.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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