Response to interpellation 2025/26:458 on a statement regarding eradicating gang crime over the next four years

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Madam Speaker! I saw which legislative lineup joined the debate, so I asked an assistant to bring me a cup of coffee.

I really look forward to this exchange. It is obvious that you feel you must be many to defeat this government and this Minister for Justice. A warm welcome!

The origin of this debate is that Teresa Carvalho has asked me what measures I and the government will take to fulfill the promise to eradicate gang crime over the next four years. It is the lethal violence that is referred to, as appears from the newspaper article that Teresa Carvalho refers to. There is no doubt that this is an ambitious approach, which only a few years ago would have appeared completely unrealistic.

It is a reality that the Social Democrats left behind a very dark failure. In principle, all curves regarding organized crime pointed in the wrong direction, particularly in terms of violence. Between 2012 and 2022, the deadly gun violence in Sweden tripled. In 2022, Sweden experienced an unthinkable 62 fatal shootings, according to the police's statistics. That was significantly more than in the other Nordic countries combined. At the same time, the recruitment of children was pushed further and further down in age, and the criminal economy grew explosively to a turnover of hundreds of billions of kronor.

The interview that formed the basis for the newspaper article I just mentioned, which constitutes the background to this interpellation debate, was conducted in connection with the Police Authority's reporting of statistics on shootings during the first quarter of this year. That statistics show that the number of shootings has decreased by 75 percent if one compares the first quarter of this year with the first quarter of 2022, that is, the Social Democrats' last year in power. On an annual basis, we see that the number of fatal shootings was halved between 2022 and 2025. This means more than 30 lives saved per year. It means that fathers can come home and hug their children, that mothers do not have to mourn their sons or daughters, and that school classes do not have to miss their classmates.

During these years, the government has provided the justice system with record-breaking resources. We have equipped law enforcement with a long series of new and effective tools, in several cases taken from counter-terrorism. We have tightened penalties to imprison dangerous gang criminals for longer periods. We have intensified international cooperation to apprehend gang leaders abroad. We have done all this while the police, among others, have shifted their methods of work to increase the systemic power against the gangs.

We now see how new resources, tools, and methods are making a real impact. We are therefore on the right track, but we are far from finished. Half of the deadly gang violence remains. The bombings and extortion violence must be pushed back. The mobilization against the digital recruitment of children and young people into violent missions must be stepped up further, and the government is doing so by moving forward before the summer with a law that gives the police new tools against online recruitment of children and young people into serious crime. As emerged from the discussion just now, we must also choke off the criminal economy, which to a very large extent drives the violence.

It is now absolutely crucial for Sweden that we hold the course and do not deviate, slow down the pace, or return to the left-wing politics and paralysis of action that caused or worsened the problems. We shall not once again give a veto to Miljöpartiet and Vänsterpartiet. Representatives for these parties should have joined the debate to provide a clear picture of what awaits after the election.

The election this autumn is about precisely this: Sweden will either continue to have a Moderate-led government, which, with a stable base in the Riksdag, continues to wage an offensive campaign against the gangs, or a Social Democratic government – with a veto from Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet – which jeopardizes what has already been achieved and blocks new effective measures to prevent and combat serious crime.

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

Teresa Carvalho (S)

Madam Speaker! According to the Minister for Justice, the number of fatal shootings was halved last year. That calculation is based on the school shooting in Örebro being excluded. Even though it was not a gang shooting, which is what this debate is about, I want to say that we must never forget or neglect the horrific events that occurred at Risbergska. Even that type of deadly violence – with firearms, I should add – must be combated and prevented by all means. This applies, of course, to all deadly violence. All human lives count. Everyone is equally worthy.

The last decade, Sweden has been plagued by raw and ruthless organized crime, brutal violence, and other system-threatening criminality. This has rightly prompted extensive measures and great efforts to reverse the development.

The previous S government began the restructuring, but it was far from sufficient. The previous S government obviously has a very large responsibility in this. We take that responsibility. That is why we have reassessed and restructured our policy.

Our criticism of the government's policy in the fight against the gangs is actually not about what the government is doing, but rather about what the government is not doing. It primarily concerns breaking the new recruitment. During this parliamentary term, the number of children under 15 suspected of being involved in murder cases has increased by over 700 percent. This has occurred at the same time as the government has put the municipalities, which perform much of the early and preventive work to break the new recruitment, on a slimming-down course.

We Social Democrats are prepared to do everything that is required – everything that is legally sound and effective. It is about both repression and prevention. We do not accept that children wake up in a panic with glass shards in their beds when yet another door is bombed in a Swedish residential area. We do not accept that ordinary, honest, innocent people are forced to flee from shootings on an open street in broad daylight in our country. Nor do we accept that parents lie awake at night, worried that their children will fall into the gangs' vile clutches.

We have done the homework. That is why I am somewhat surprised that the government now, by claiming victory in advance, is making the same mistake that the previous S government is accused of having made. To eradicate gang crime over the next four years is obviously a very laudable ambition, but unfortunately, there is not much that indicates that you will succeed in this. The government leans solely on the fact that the shootings have become fewer since the worst year, 2022, when the Foxtrot war raged at its worst, and does not see the whole picture. The government turns a blind eye to the fact that the number of explosions has doubled, that the criminal economy has grown, and that new recruitment has skyrocketed under the Tidö government's watch. What I see is that the fight against the gangs is far from won.

Is there anything that the Minister for Justice thinks the government has failed with during this mandate period? And what should the next government – regardless of color, or perhaps even in consensus – prioritize next?

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

Heléne Björklund (S)

Madam Speaker and Minister for Justice! Something happens when the sign outside the police station is unscrewed around Sweden. It is not just a local station that is closing – above all, many people feel that they are being deprived of their security when the state leaves the area.

This is happening right now all over Sweden – in Hallstavik, in Olofström, in Leksand, in Rättvik, in Vansbro and at home in Sölvesborg. It is happening at the same time as gang crime creeps further out across the entire country. It is happening at the same time as many business owners are sounding the alarm about crime. It is happening at the same time as people feel unsafe, regardless of the facts.

Many people I meet do not want to report a crime via an app or via telephone. They want to do it at a police station, preferably in the locality or in the municipality where they live. This applies in particular to women who have been subjected to violence in close relationships. They want to walk through a door and sit down and talk to someone, preferably someone they know is always on site.

It also concerns older people, people with disabilities and people who do not manage the digital.

But those who most often say this are entrepreneurs, who time and again are affected by thefts, vandalism, and threats. Entrepreneurs build our societies, create jobs, keep towns alive, and sponsor both sports clubs and local engagement. When companies say that local police presence and open police stations matter, I mean that the Minister for Justice and the government should listen.

The Minister of Justice says that the government prioritizes local police presence, but the people, in any case where I live, see something else. They do not see that there are more police officers, but rather that the police have left the municipality, and they feel abandoned. The government answers time and again that it is the Police Authority's decision, but one can indeed make decisions regarding local presence.

Has the government conducted any impact assessment of what it means for safety when the local police station closes? Has one seen how it affects the willingness to report crimes and people's trust in the state? Does the minister understand what I am describing? Does the minister hear the same thing as I do, i.e., that people experience that the social contract is broken when the local police presence disappears and police stations close?

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

TREDJE VICE TALMANNEN

The interpellation concerns gang crime, and therefore it is obviously what the interpellation debate shall be about.

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

Petter Löberg (S)

Madam Speaker! In light of the aforementioned debate article, the Minister for Justice answers the question of how the government's promise will be fulfilled. But the interesting thing in the answer is, in fact, what is missing. The government is happy to take the credit for the fact that the shootings are decreasing, but one must also be honest about how political change actually works in practice.

Political change does not begin and end with solemn faces and quick talking points during press conferences in the room next door, but it is investigations, preparations, legislation, agency building, refining and sharpening of the police's methods and tools, and international cooperation, that is, much of what the Minister of Justice describes. But this spans many parliamentary terms, and to claim otherwise is, of course, merely political rhetoric of the worst kind.

Many of the tools that the authorities can use today were initiated by us, and during previous interpellation debates, we have shown with the help of the Riksdag's investigation service that 75 percent of the investigations were initiated by us. Today it may be fewer because you have had a certain pace of reform. Let me be honest that many were also initiated via announcements by the Riksdag, which expressed a popular will because we had a bourgeois majority in the Riksdag. Both the former and current governments have therefore done this work.

Under the previous government, it was also common with parliamentary inquiries where the parties together tried to figure out how best to meet the challenges, and I believe that the Swedes expect such inquiries.

It was an uphill battle for us as well. You think you have an uphill battle, but I, who have been there throughout the entire journey – I entered the Riksdag in 2014 – can state that one could see one's reflection in the polished desks on the floors below the Prime Minister's. They were completely empty of preparatory work on how to combat gang crime. Even worse was it when it came to preparatory work on how to combat the terror threats Europe faced and many other challenges. We often had to start from scratch. Sweden had a police training that was put on a starvation diet and reduced to a minimum level. It is, therefore, two sides of the same coin.

Based on this narrative and these questions, it is somewhat remarkable that the Minister for Justice places such great emphasis on our coalition partners. Of course, there is some spin doctor among you who has thought that one can scare the voters by saying that Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet will get a veto if there is a new government. But these parties did their duty in the Riksdag during those many long and difficult years.

Is it Fredrik Malmborg, no, Martin Malmberg, no, Martin Marmgren is his name, from Järva, who was an MP for the Green Party, that you are going to frighten me with?

(Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer (M): Martin Borgs?)

Or is it the Left Party's Gudrun Nordborg in the Committee on Justice that you are going to intimidate? She is one of Sweden's leading jurists when it comes to women's issues and has taught on it for many years.

This is not credible. Focus on answering the question of what you want to do moving forward, and stop trying to scare people with parties that are not even present in the chamber!

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

TREDJE VICE TALMANNEN

This is not a general debate, but it is only one at a time who has the floor.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Madam Speaker! It is quite far from my personality to be negative. I try to avoid it, and therefore it feels strange to me to have to say that I am actually a bit disappointed with the Minister's answer. I have previously praised Gunnar Strömmer for being a factual and serious debater, even when we have had different political views. We have had many debates in the chamber where we have nevertheless been able to land on the fact that we see the problems but have different solutions to them. I therefore thought that the tone in the answer was a bit distressing.

Madam Speaker! Let me return to the issue at hand. When we talk about gang crime, we almost always talk about boys and young men, but on a number of occasions, the Minister of Justice and I have stood here in the chamber and spoken about the part of gang crime that is often missed, namely girls and young women who are drawn into criminal networks.

Girls and young women are no longer just enablers but also perpetrators of very serious violent crimes. For example, four 15-year-old girls are currently detained following a gang murder in Stockholm, and several of them have no prior convictions. These are children who have been recruited from the same school, and teachers are now testifying about empty chairs in the classrooms. We must also see this reality.

It is no longer about any isolated cases. The police estimate that approximately 10,000 girls and young women are either active in or connected to criminal networks. Many of them, however, are both perpetrators and crime victims. Brå has shown in a study that many of these girls had experience of threats, violence, and sexual abuse even before they were drawn into crime.

Madam Speaker! This means that we must be able to hold two thoughts in our heads at the same time. Yes, serious crimes should have clear consequences, but if we do not understand the mechanisms behind the recruitment, we will also not be able to break it. When both the police and Brå and other researchers describe how girls are groomed into criminality by being lured with makeup, clothes, appreciation, and money, only to then be pressured or threatened into committing crimes, it is just another sign of how incredibly ruthless the criminal networks are. Then it is not enough to only talk about harsher punishments, but we must also build a society that catches the children before the gangs do.

Crime is moving further down in age and into environments where the adult world previously believed it did not exist. It is now also becoming apparent that an even greater focus is required to also capture the girls. The school must gain better knowledge of what the recruitment of girls looks like, and social services must have resources to work proactively towards girls. We must also dare to talk about the vulnerability many girls live in, where crime, relationships, threats, and sexual violence are often interconnected.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats know that the fight against gangs must be both tough and smart. Of course, those who commit serious crimes must be prosecuted and kept away from society. But we must also stop the new recruitment and have a clear equality perspective on this, otherwise new children will constantly replace those who disappear.

I therefore wonder: What does the work look like to also catch girls and young women within gang crime?

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

Mattias Vepsä (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the opportunity to discuss gang crime in the chamber of the Riksdag. Dealing with that social problem is an urgent matter.

Many of us remember the election campaign four years ago when the Moderaterna, Sverigedemokraterna and the other governing parties went to the election on a promise to address the development that we all completely agree we want to break.

I intended to devote a few words and a few minutes to discussing whether the Justice Minister's and the Prime Minister's claims in Aftonbladet a few months ago are actually correct, that is, whether we could get rid of the problems if they are allowed to continue for another four years in the same way. The question we need to ask ourselves is: Is it correct?

If we look at reality, we see something completely different. It is true, just as the minister said earlier in the debate, that gun violence and deadly violence have decreased. We all in the Riksdag think that is great. We are in complete agreement that it is a positive trend and that we shall do everything we can to combat deadly gun violence.

At the same time, the explosions are increasing, and they are at historically high levels. In fact, we stand out in Europe as the country where the most explosions occur, and it is the youth who continue to be recruited into the gangs that carry out these robbery missions. When the police looked at the situation assessment in the autumn, they concluded that the recruitment to the gangs remains high and that there are still approximately 17,000 people in the circles surrounding the criminal gangs.

We agree on much in crime policy, just as was raised earlier in this debate, especially when it comes to more police, better tools and increased penalties that hit gang crime and serious organized crime, and we are ready to do more to do something about the problem. But nowhere in the debate so far, nor in the response we have been made aware of, has the government side mentioned words like prevention or addressing the recruitment to the gangs. From that perspective – when it comes to doing something about the new recruitment to the gangs – the last four years have been a lost mandate period.

At the same time as the government has pursued a policy for more police and reviewed increased penalties, in an attempt to address recruitment that way, we have seen that the queue is growing and that more people are waiting. The municipalities have been put on a starvation diet. At the same time as the costs for families and welfare have increased dramatically, the government during this mandate period has pursued an economic policy that has caused Sveriges Lärare to warn of the worst cuts in 30 years.

The social workers are sounding the alarm and saying that more and more colleagues are being laid off and that they are not hiring those who are to do the work to break the recruitment. We have also seen that the number of children involved in serious violent crimes and murder cases is at a record high; in fact, it has increased by 500 percent during the government's time in power.

This is a lost parliamentary term. We agree on much, but we do not agree on the lack of preventive measures. The Minister builds up a false contradiction in his answer. We are for police, we are for tools, and we are for sharp legislation to deal with serious organized crime. But we are against leaning back and wanting four more years with a policy of cuts for school, social services, families with children, and the fight against unemployment. Then, we mean, the gangs' opportunities to continue recruiting children into serious crime will increase.

The question the minister must ask himself is whether we can afford four more years with the Tidö government. Is it not time to acknowledge that it requires both more police and investments to break gang recruitment?

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

Lars Isacsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister of Justice, for the opportunity to debate this!

I know that everyone in this chamber is glad that the deadly violence has been pushed back. Fewer fatal shootings mean fewer families having their lives destroyed. But at the same time as Sweden has become better at combating parts of the violence, organized economic crime has continued to advance its positions. We see it in the welfare system, in companies, in public procurement, in assistance, in the healthcare sector, in HVB operations and in other parts of society where truly large sums of money circulate. We also see it in the working life and in sports, not least within football.

It is about organized and mafia-like structures that use companies, associations, and welfare systems as a business model. We in the Social Democrats believe that the work against this type of crime is still far too fragmented. I know that several large steps have been taken, but even more needs to be done.

The criminals work as corporations, while we in society work more in silos. The police see one part, the municipalities another, the regions a third, and the Economic Crime Authority a fourth, while the criminals see the entire chain. We need better coordination between authorities, stricter control of welfare actors and corporate structures, and greater opportunities to freeze and forfeit criminals' assets. We need a Swedish mafia legislation that is adapted to how organized crime actually functions in 2026. Yes, we have become better at combating the violence, but we must also break down the business model behind the violence.

I intended to bring up another issue, Madam Speaker, which is related to gang crime. It concerns three supporter groups in Gothenburg that have been classified as criminal networks. This is how the journalist Mikael Wagner wrote in Aftonbladet tonight: The police and the fans need a crisis commission and urgent help just to manage to sit down and talk to each other. The abyss between the authorities and a divided supporter collective has never been greater.

What happened in Gothenburg yesterday shows once again how quickly this situation escalates, how the image of what has occurred differs, and how the conflicts grow. In the midst of all this, Swedish football risks being torn apart by polarization instead of uniting around solutions. It felt so predictable yesterday, and the conflict is becoming a self-playing piano. A national coordinator for supporter culture and police cooperation was needed – someone who can bring the actors together, contribute to a common situational overview, work on a research basis, and rebuild the trust that is now being lost.

I usually highlight the positive aspects of Swedish supporter culture – that it is world-class and contributes when it comes to voluntary work, attendance, women and children, and attendance records – and that we should focus on what truly threatens it: the organized crime that is eating its way into football. That picture is still just as true, but right now the government needs to step forward, be the adult in the room and resolve the conflicts that have their epicenter in Gothenburg, before they spread across the whole of Sweden, because then we risk something very fine being lost.

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

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Madam Speaker! Hello, Minister of Justice! Thank you, everyone involved, for this debate on an incredibly pressing issue! Much important has already been raised by my colleagues, but I would like to focus on something that is a matter close to my heart, namely the vulnerable and at-risk children.

These children should be able to live a good and safe life – it simply must always be the goal and a right for every child. It is also the vulnerable and exposed children who are most accessible and can end up in the clutches of gangs hunting for new enablers and perpetrators. There, I heard no promises for the future from the Minister for Justice.

The first thing I think of are the children who do not succeed in school. Sveriges Lärare released the report F as in prison today. It shows that the odds of later in life being sentenced to prison are 9 times higher for students with at most eight passing grades from primary school and 14 times higher for students who completely lack a final grade than for students without failing grades.

Sveriges Lärares demands of us in national politics are as clear as they are self-evident: All students must receive the support they need in a timely manner. Teachers' conditions must be strengthened with smaller classes and more time to prepare and follow up on the teaching. The state must take greater responsibility for funding and resource distribution.

The school's failure to provide all students with the right conditions to succeed increases the risk of crime.

We also know that these gangs do not hesitate to target their recruitment towards children with intellectual disabilities in adapted schools. It is terribly ruthless and cynical. It is important that the government takes this issue with the utmost seriousness and supports the municipalities and the schools and ensures that they have sufficient resources to build solid protective barriers around these children.

Madam Speaker! Other extremely vulnerable children are those who are subjected to or experience violence in the place where they should be safest – at home. Violence breeds violence; we know that. We also know that the consequences for children exposed to violence are extremely serious. There is a great risk of mental ill-health. This has consequences for the children's self-esteem and for their affect regulation. One can also see poorer school results, problems with substance abuse, and an increased risk of crime.

Actually, this is quite logical. It is not strange that some of the children who live in a great powerlessness and in a home where violence is completely normalized and a part of everyday life seek status, power, and violence capital outside the home.

We are now seeing a complete escalation of the new recruitment. It is like a pandemic spreading rapidly across the country, over the internet, and actually in all types of residential areas. During the corona pandemic, the government at the time said that the question of money should not stand in the way of municipalities' and regions' ability to save lives. The same clear answer should the current government have given when it comes to the new recruitment.

I wonder what measures the Minister for Justice envisions when it comes to building secure protective barriers around the vulnerable and exposed children – for their sake, but also in order to be able to break the new recruitment.

(cont.)

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