Response to interpellations 2023/24:657 and 667 on the legal scope for economic violence and criminal liability for psychological violence

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! Sanna Backeskog has asked me if I and the government consider that psychological violence should be criminalized, if there is ongoing work at the Ministry of Justice to get a bill in place and what the timeline for the work looks like in that case, as well as whether the public can expect that psychological violence will be criminalized during 2024.

Furthermore, Åsa Eriksson has asked me what measures I intend to take so that economic violence shall receive its own legal space.

Preventing and combating violence and violations in close relationships are high-priority issues for the government. Regardless of the form in which such violence occurs, it constitutes a serious societal problem that can never be accepted.

The government is now carrying out a historic reorganization of crime policy where the focus is shifted from the perpetrator to the victim's redress and society's need for protection. An important part of the work is to combat men's violence against women, other forms of violence in close relationships, and honor-related violence and oppression. The government is therefore working intensively with a number of different legislative proposals to move the positions forward in the fight against different forms of relationship violence.

Well-functioning contact prohibition legislation constitutes an important part of providing protection for those who are vulnerable. In February, the report A more effective contact prohibition legislation - an increased protection for vulnerable persons (SOU 2024:13) was submitted to the government. The investigation proposes, among other things, that improper surveillance in the form of, for example, GPS transmitters or apps, which constitute a form of psychological violence, should be able to form the basis for a contact prohibition. It is also proposed that more circumstances, for example harassment, should be considered in the risk assessment even if the actions do not reach the threshold of what is punishable. The report is now out for consultation.

As part of this reorganization, the government in the summer commissioned a special investigator to conduct a review of the sentencing scales and reform the sentencing system so that the sentences shall better reflect the severity of the crimes than they do today (dir. 2023:115 and dir. 2023:181). The government has also commissioned an investigator to consider changes within the framework of the sentencing system that involve expanded or new possibilities to decide where a convicted person shall stay or may not stay (dir. 2022:95 and dir. 2023:74). This is assessed, among other things, to be able to provide increased protection for those who have been subjected to violence or other violations in a close relationship.

In November last year, a report was submitted to the government where it is, among other things, proposed that gender should be added as a new ground in the provision regarding increased penalties for crimes committed with hate crime motives (SOU 2023:80). The consultation period expired in March, and the proposals are currently being prepared in the Government Offices.

It is also central to look at what is sometimes described as a kind of post-violence. During the year, the government intends, as part of this work, to appoint an inquiry that reviews the division of property process. The purpose is to ensure a well-functioning, efficient, and legally secure order for divisions of property. The regulatory framework must not be able to be exploited by a violent partner for the purpose of delaying the division of property process.

Furthermore, the government has recently commissioned an investigator to propose how the right to a victim's counsel can be strengthened, among other things in relation to crimes in close relationships.

We are also making reforms in the area of tenancy law. In March, the government submitted a bill to the Riksdag which, among other things, strengthens the tenancy law protection for women subjected to violence by making it easier for a landlord to evict a tenant who uses the apartment to perpetrate violence against a close relative, while simultaneously strengthening the victimized partner's opportunity to take over the lease.

In the area of gender equality policy, the government is additionally investing just over 600 million kronor during 2024 on measures aimed at preventing and combating men's violence against women, other violence in close relationships, as well as honor-related violence and oppression. The government has also appointed an inquiry to strengthen the long-term governance in this area (dir. 2023:117), and work is also underway to develop a new action program for the period 2024-2026 with the aim of preventing and combating men's violence against women.

As appears from Sanna Backeskog's question, a specific crime targeting precisely psychological violence has been proposed in the memorandum Criminal Liability for Psychological Violence (Ds 2022:18). The memorandum also describes that economic violence, for example in the form of monitoring and taking control over another person's login credentials and bank accounts, can constitute a form of psychological violence. According to the proposal, economic violence should be covered by the criminal provision on psychological violence.

The referral has been submitted, and several referral bodies have submitted relatively extensive comments. This concerns, among other things, the bill's compatibility with the principle of legality's basic requirements of clarity and predictability, which is important for both the suspect and the crime victim. It also concerns the risk that the new crime could be misused by perpetrators against the persons whom they themselves have subjected to violence.

It is against this background that it is important that both the proposal and the views of the referral bodies are analyzed carefully. This work is currently ongoing within the Government Offices. I do not wish to anticipate the result of that process other than by reiterating that the fundamental question of women's and men's equal right to safety and freedom from both physical and psychological violence is extremely urgent.

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

Åsa Eriksson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.

Men's violence against women takes many different forms. The most alarming is, of course, that a total of 13 women have been murdered so far this year. In at least 9 of the cases, a man the woman has or has had a relationship with is suspected of being the perpetrator. It is inconceivable. It is difficult to take in.

The murdered women receive attention, but too late. They have already lost their lives, their children have already lost their mother, and their relatives have lost a loved one. They are the small, visible tip of the gigantic, tragic iceberg hiding beneath the surface: all the women who are subjected to violence in different ways in their everyday lives.

Mr. Speaker! Economic violence is about gaining power and control over another person through economic or work-restricting means. It is common with calculated economic violence in relationships where other types of violence also occur.

Being subjected to economic violence is, of course, a misery, a terror, as long as it continues, but it also limits the victim's opportunity to leave the destructive relationship. Despite this, economic violence has no own legal space today – hence the interpellation.

Mr. Speaker! I would like to quote from the report Svensk. Kvinna. Ägd. by Maria Arkeby:

"That" - that is, economic violence - "implies a shift and a successive control over another person. - - - A woman who is broken down economically is also broken down mentally and begins to doubt herself in relation to other people, perhaps even at work."

It is the case that women who are affected are often exposed to several types of violence; physical, psychological and economic violence. And even if you are not exposed to direct economic violence, the physical and psychological violence often causes the woman to be on sick leave for shorter periods, or long-term sick leave, which of course has serious economic consequences.

Mr. Speaker! The Swedish Enforcement Authority divides economic violence into three different parts. The first is economic control, which concerns a perpetrator taking control over how one uses their money, demanding something in exchange for money, controlling bank statements, or giving money as a reward. Then there is income sabotage, which means that a perpetrator prevents a person from obtaining their own income through work or studies. Finally, we have economic exploitation, which means that a perpetrator, for example, forces a person to, as the Minister mentioned, hand over a BankID or sign for bank loans or subscriptions against their will. It can also involve a person being forced to act as a front for companies or someone starting companies in their name.

We must, Mr. Speaker, put a stop to all types of violence against women - not least economic violence, which is often not visible.

The Minister for Justice says in his response that he wants economic violence to be included in the crime category of psychological violence. I would therefore like to ask if the Minister for Justice sees any risks with economic violence not being given its own legal space.

(Applause)

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

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister of Justice, for wanting to discuss these very important issues with us this Friday morning!

Friday is for many the last day of the work week, and many are probably now looking forward to the weekend. But for many women and children, Friday is the worst day of the week. It is then that perhaps the Friday beer is cracked open and controlling behaviors and threatening and disparaging comments rain down.

There is no all-encompassing definition of psychological violence, but it can involve repeated violations or shaming the victim in front of others. The perpetrator is often manipulative, and it is common for the victim to eventually begin to believe what the perpetrator says. It can target everything that defines the person, such as parenting ability, intelligence, humor, or sexuality. Often, it is about taking control over and restricting the victim's living space and social relations.

It can also be about economic violence, just as Åsa Eriksson told. Therefore, I think it is good that we can debate this in the same debate here in the chamber today.

Psychological violence is, with today's legislation, very difficult to address. It places women and children in an extremely vulnerable situation.

One reason why psychological violence is not given enough attention may be that the risks of the violence are underestimated. Research shows, however, that serious psychological violence, in the form of for example threats and controlling behavior, can have similar negative health consequences as physical violence – PTSD, depression, self-harming behavior, and physical ill health.

Member of Parliament Sofia Amloh and I had a productive dialogue with the Minister for Justice on this issue in the chamber last year. At that time, I felt that we agreed that it is important to find a way forward to better be able to stop the perpetrator and ensure the safety and right to freedom of those subjected to violence. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I must admit that I was very disappointed when I saw the government's list of bills for 2024 and then invited an interpellation debate again to ask whether work on a bill is underway in the Ministry of Justice.

Since we debated this issue last year, unfortunately, violence against women by men has become even more topical. So far, 2024 has been a very dark year as at least 13 women have been murdered.

But we also know more today than we did last year. On January 31, the Socialstyrelsen's injury and death investigations for 2022-2023 were released. The compilation of the investigations is presented every two years, and what is new for this year's report is that a serious connection between psychological and physical violence has been able to be seen.

There are several cases where only psychological violence occurred before a murder was committed. There is a clear deficiency in society's safety net here. The report shows that when crime victims have spoken about psychological violence, such as controlling and demeaning behavior or that the perpetrator stalked and threatened the crime victim after a separation, this has unfortunately not been taken seriously enough. The risks of psychological violence have been underestimated. It also appears in the report that the perpetration of violence is rarely noticed.

I understand that the Minister for Justice and the Ministry need to make important trade-offs regarding the bill, partly to ensure legal certainty and partly to ensure that the legislation achieves its intended effect. But therefore, I would like to ask if we could get a slightly clearer statement from the Minister for Justice on whether he considers it urgent to establish well-balanced legislation regarding the criminalization of psychological violence and what the work at the Ministry actually looks like.

(Applause)

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

Annika Strandhäll (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister of Justice, that we can have this interpellation debate!

I will broaden the perspective a little bit. It is no secret for the Minister for Justice that we Social Democrats, to put it cautiously, have been critical of the sitting government's initiative when it comes to the work regarding men's violence against women. We have spoken about this before, both in this chamber and in dialogue in the Justice Committee.

My colleague Sanna Backeskog raised the disappointment she experienced when the list of government bills for 2024 arrived. It is a disappointment that many of us share. We could observe that when it comes to new legislation for this year, the list of government bills from this government echoes with a lack of new initiatives in the area. It is extremely serious against the background that only this far into the year - we are now in April - at least 13 women have been murdered. Of them, 9 were murdered by someone they were or had been in a relationship with.

When it comes to the work regarding men's violence against women, the Minister for Justice cannot simply offer lip service and speak about prioritizing the issue when, de facto, nothing is happening in reality.

In this interpellation debate, the proposal to criminalize psychological violence is raised. Psychological violence is actually a part of almost all violence committed against women by those they have a relationship with.

When we have studied the government's work in the area of men's violence against women, we have been able to observe that, on the contrary, measures are being taken that reduce the possibilities of addressing this pandemic that hits Swedish women every day. For example, after 17 years, the state funding for the municipalities' work on women's peace has been choked off. That was done already in January 2023.

The important initiative for women's peace that Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner has conducted, which has been crucial for supporting social workers and operations across the country, has also been discontinued.

One wants to implement the reform on protected housing that we submitted, but has pushed it to a budget that only corresponds to 6 percent of what is required to comply with the law.

Women's shelters are threatened by a permit requirement for protected housing. And the government lacks a plan for how to solve these issues.

The finished legislative proposals on violence against women are, as said, not being presented. Already in November 2022, the referral bodies had submitted their responses to the then government. The issue has therefore been pending for over a year and a half. The Minister for Justice must be able to provide an answer here today on whether he intends to present a legislative proposal in this area. For example, the Minister for Justice's own agency, the Swedish Police Authority, has said yes to it. One thinks that is good.

My question to the Minister of Justice is: Will you move forward with a legislative proposal?

(Applause)

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer and for the opportunity to stand here again and have this very important debate!

We Social Democrats welcome several of the proposals that the government is looking at, working on, and intend to present. I perhaps want to particularly emphasize that which concerns the division of property. It becomes palpable that when perpetrators of violence prevent the division of property, it prevents many from moving forward, getting away and being able to flee a violent relationship. I want to emphasize that this, but also much else, is particularly welcome.

I still want to emphasize what the interpellator Backeskog points out here: Psychological abuse is about systematically and repeatedly violating the victim. Often, the perpetrator is a very manipulative person who defines who you are and what you do. It gets deep inside you, repeatedly and systematically. Eventually, you believe it, regardless of where you come from and regardless of what circumstances you had previously. You can be very secure in yourself, be self-confident and have good self-esteem, but after systematic psychological violence, which breaks people down – it breaks down these women – you believe the manipulative narrative. It makes you believe in something else, in what is said.

Psychological abuse in a relationship is often the form of violence that manifests first. That violence is also often experienced as most offensive, unpredictable, and incredibly stressful. Psychological violence is a comprehensive problem that has major consequences for those who are exposed to it. There is a great need to make it visible in a criminal justice system.

Women who are murdered by men in their vicinity have often been subjected to psychological violence for a long time. It is not uncommon to also see economic violence. It is perhaps rather common.

Mr. Speaker! On January 6, 2024, a woman was found dead in a residence in Vagnhärad. A man was arrested at the same time in the residence. On December 29, 2023, a woman was found dead in a residence in Vingåker. Her husband has been arrested. He has been previously convicted of assaulting her.

Both cases occurred in my own constituency during the Christmas break. In one case, the woman's husband had been arrested two months before the woman was found murdered for having threatened her with a pair of scissors because she wanted to leave him. In the police interrogation, the woman said: I no longer want to be a punching bag. She also stated that she was subjected to several different forms of violence, not least psychological violence.

If more forms of violence are criminalized, I am convinced that in many more cases we can prevent the ultimate consequence, a fatal outcome. At the same time, we can say from the society's side that regardless of expression, violence is an exercise of power and oppression that no one should be subjected to.

As we said, we had a debate last June regarding the criminalization of psychological violence. At that time, the Minister responded that we could expect to receive a proposal on the floor of the Riksdag. The question is whether we can do it within a year.

(Applause)

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Åsa Eriksson and Sanna Backeskog, for the opportunity to discuss these important issues today!

I will begin with psychological violence. We are in complete agreement regarding the societal problems and the problems that consequently arise for individuals, for individual women, as described in the memorandum where proposals in the area are presented. All the behaviors and abuses that the memorandum targets are such things that should be criminalized in Sweden. We are in complete agreement on that. The question is only how we achieve this in a way that is precise, achieves the intended effect, and is predictable, perhaps not primarily for the suspect, but for the crime victim and the potential crime victim. That is the work that is ongoing.

I think one should keep a cool head in relation to referral bodies, but there is a dimension of referral body criticism that is extremely important to take note of. It concerns criticism from those practitioners who are to handle this. Will it work in practice, and will it have the intended effect? On that point, there were quite extensive views, not least from the judiciary, on the proposed model. For me, it is therefore not an argument for not taking this further, but it is an argument to work with it in a careful manner so that it has precisely the effect that I know the interpellants, many others, and I myself are requesting.

One dimension of the proposal that is raised, not least by several women's organizations in civil society, is the risks with this way of regulating this. It could become a kind of power struggle when a man who hits will be able to claim in his defense that the woman first exercised psychological violence against him. One could say that is a latent risk with all such legislation, but I also think that it underscores the importance of achieving precision in it so that one avoids those types of effects.

I intend to find a way forward. That work is ongoing. I think there is something to the point that it may be going slower than one would wish, but the ambition exists. I am convinced that it will be possible to find a good way forward.

Regarding economic violence, it is not actually my proposal that it should be included in the definition of psychological violence, but rather the path that the investigator has pointed out in the memorandum. I have no strong preference there. I think there is some truth in the concerns that Åsa Eriksson highlights and that there might possibly be a strength in regulating it in a special way. It is one of the questions we are looking at now when we are to take care of the whole.

That all dimensions of economic violence - that is, control, what was described as income sabotage and exploitation - should be covered by a criminalization is definitely my focus. Then we just have to find a way to solve it so that it gains the power, clarity, and visibility that the problems deserve. In that context, I want to mention property divisions again, which are another dimension of economic violence - even if it is perhaps rather economic violence aimed at trying to prevent a vulnerable woman from leaving a destructive relationship.

Lastly, I want to say regarding the bill lists and other matters concerning the penalties, the conditional release, the restraining orders, the protection under tenancy law, and the possibilities of using secret coercive measures also against this type of crime—we would have been in a much better position today if they had been in place five or ten years ago. Now they are coming, and I am proud of that. I am convinced that they will make an extraordinarily great difference for all women who are victims of violence in this country.

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

Åsa Eriksson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister of Justice, for the answer! I am sincerely pleased, because I believe I hear an opening for economic violence to be able to get its own legal space. It feels positive. We can continue to work on that. I also want to say that I appreciate all the efforts that the government is actually making to combat relational violence and honor-based oppression.

I become curious about the investigation that reviews the division of assets. I would like to see the Minister elaborate on how it is to curb economic violence. My colleagues have very clearly highlighted what misery many women live in, and we must urgently do everything we can to curb it.

Mr. Speaker! In a close relationship, economic violence can, for example, manifest in that one party has control over both parties' finances and that one party is not allowed to have their own bank account or bank card. It can involve that all expenses must be accounted for, which makes it impossible to have space to save one's own money in order to later be able to leave the relationship. It is a form of psychological violence; I agree with that. But economic violence can also manifest in other ways. Therefore, I argue that it needs its own legal space.

Other ways to exercise economic violence are to indebt the victim of violence through loans or unpaid invoices and to delay the division of assets upon separation, as the Minister was mentioning, so that the victimized party does not get access to their capital. It can also involve the perpetrator stealing joint money or money saved for the children.

Economic violence can also mean that the person subjected to the violence completely lacks the financial means to leave the relationship. It can range from not even having money to take a taxi and flee from physical violence to being unable to secure a new home or even sign up for a personal phone subscription because the perpetrator has put them into debt.

Mr. Speaker! Economic violence deprives many women of all self-determination, affects their opportunities to put food on the table for their children, and makes it impossible for them to pay sky-high costs for lawyers in civil law cases. I am not a lawyer and do not have the exact answers on how this should be done, but I expect that the Minister for Justice and his entire department can formulate legislation that saves women from economic violence and puts pressure on various actors, not least the banks, to prevent women's economic vulnerability.

Mr. Speaker! Is it perhaps time for a financial consensus legislation?

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

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Mr. Speaker! I understand that the Minister for Justice, just like me, follows accounts on social media that highlight the prevalence of violence in close relationships. The testimonies on, for example, the Instagram account Gömda Kvinnor give a clear picture of how urgent it is to quickly address the problem of psychological violence. I become so furious – excuse the language – when I see how ruthless perpetrators can continue to perpetrate violence against their former partners and also their children after the separation.

A woman I met told me about how the psychological violence escalated after she had managed to get herself and her daughter away from the perpetrator to the women's shelter's protected housing. When he could not reach her directly, personally, he did everything he could to harm her in other ways, for example by delaying the division of property - as the Minister for Justice has mentioned - and through repeated disputes over custody and visitation. He also spread lies about her to family and friends. She said something like this: Proving one's innocence in the face of false accusations and when one is smeared on social media takes time, costs money, and takes a toll on mental health.

Mr. Speaker! Both the National Board of Health and Welfare and the Gender Equality Authority, as well as women's organizations, testify that society actually has a considerable number of tools and methodological support in place that could reduce violence against women and children. New types of crimes have been added to the criminal catalog, and several sentences have been increased. There is a national strategy against men's violence against women and honor-related violence and oppression, and there is a 99-point program. There are guidelines for both social services and health and medical care. There is important research to be guided by and evidence-based methods regarding the preventive work. More is needed, but there are important tools in place. A major problem that very many actors point out, however, is the implementation.

I think that introducing criminal liability for psychological violence could serve as norm-forming for society as a whole and for our important institutions such as the school, social services, and healthcare. It might make people take such tasks regarding violence more seriously. It would, of course, need to be done together with more knowledge-raising initiatives.

Society must be better at detecting children who are suffering and are subjected to violence at home. An equality policy against social vulnerability is needed, and the work against destructive masculinity norms in schools must continue. I also think that the guidelines and methodological support described by Socialstyrelsen that are not followed must be followed. Risk assessments must be used.

All employees who may encounter victims of violence or perpetrators need to have sufficient knowledge and sufficient tools to be able to act. Socialstyrelsen highlights, for example, in its report that it is very important that the social services pay more attention to psychological violence and what consequences it can have for the victim of violence. For that, knowledge-enhancing interventions are needed.

I believe we all agree that social services, schools, and health and medical care are vital actors. But the economic situation out in the country is tough, and there I want to emphasize that it is not about the municipality's priorities primarily, but that there is simply a lack of money because the municipalities have not been compensated at all for inflation or for the cost increases by the government.

It is a matter of, for example, needing to set aside important preventive units. In that case, it can be difficult to simultaneously work in a way that is skill-developing and development-based.

Therefore, I would like to conclude, Mr. Speaker, by asking what measures the Minister for Justice will take regarding precisely these issues – increasing knowledge, preventive work, and ensuring that important tools and guidelines are actually implemented where they are needed and across the entire country.

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

Annika Strandhäll (S)

Mr. Speaker! I do not intend to be quite as kind as some of my party colleagues have been.

On 18 October 2022, the Minister for Justice took office. It has been 18 months.

I have myself been a minister. I have been a department head for nearly six years. I know that if the Minister for Justice had thought it was urgent to present this proposal, it would have been on the Riksdag's table for a long time.

On November 15, 2022, less than a month after the Minister for Justice had taken office, he had all the referral responses on this investigation at the Ministry of Justice. It does not take 17 months to prepare such a matter if one wants to present it. If the Minister for Justice had thought there were problems with certain parts of the referral criticism or needed a different basis for preparation, he would have had time to obtain it.

It makes me very skeptical that one of the few fully investigated proposals in this area, which was on the Minister for Justice's desk and was more or less ready to be presented to the Riksdag, has not been presented.

Here stands the Minister for Justice today, 18 months later, and still cannot give an answer as to when this will be laid before the Riksdag. I find that completely unacceptable, Gunnar Strömmer, and my question remains. Will you lay this before the Riksdag during this year?

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Mr. Speaker! In 2022, 62 people died from gang crime. In 2023, 65 people died in workplace accidents. In 2024, so far this year, 13 women have been murdered.

The government needs to be able to handle having several societal problems in its field of vision. I think several parts here testify to that it does. What I am questioning is rather the speed, the pace, and the priorities that are made.

I understand that one needs to take into account what the referral bodies submit and what the Minister has reported here today - that one needs to accommodate certain parts of it to hit the mark accurately. That is very good, but how long will it take? What needs to be done? Those are the questions that remain - this in contrast to other proposals that the government places on the Riksdag's table, where it can go very quickly in relation to what the referral bodies have said.

I want to return to what could become a tradition; I do not hope it will. But we had this debate a year ago, Mr. Speaker, and then the Minister had an appeal to us: "Feel free to chase me here in a year if it is not on the Riksdag's table at that time." I think, of course, that we should heed and take that appeal to heart.

My question is still whether we will see a proposal for legislation on the Riksdag's table before the next major holiday, Midsummer.

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! I confirm the motion. I am happy to be pursued in this pressing matter - hopefully not year after year, but we shall manage to achieve a delivery that ensures that the fine tradition must nevertheless cease at some appropriate point.

I think like this: One can naturally have different demands over 18 months in this area. I can only state that very much of what should have been in place, not just 18 months ago but five years ago or ten years ago, is now arriving with very high speed and with a very deep and a great force.

It is the restraining orders. It is the protection under the rental law. It is the use of coercive measures, which should be able to be implemented even in this type of crime.

It concerns the penalties, and may I just say in connection with the focus that when we took the broad approach to the penalties this summer, I also received criticism from the Social Democrats. But then the criticism was that I was unfocused because I did not direct my focus solely towards the criminal gangs.

My simple counter-question is whether the Social Democrats think that today's penalties regarding violence against women and sexual assault reflect the seriousness of the crimes in a reasonable way. I do not think so. Therefore, I think it is important that we do something about them.

Do the Social Democrats think that the regulation we have inherited, which means that a rapist with a high risk of reoffending is still released on parole because the Prison and Probation Service does not even have the possibility to weigh that aspect in its decisions on parole, is reasonable? I do not think so.

In the month that the Social Democrats think this is an expression of a lack of focus, I want to say that my focus encompasses both reforms in the field of criminal law intended to crack down on serious gang crime and offensive proposals intended to meet the violence that women here in this country are subjected to and the unreasonably lax response that the criminal justice system and the rule of law provide in those respects.

When it comes to what we are talking about today, I want to say that all the things we have talked about, all the problems that have been highlighted, shall be criminalized in this country.

I have, as I have said, no problem with remaining independent regarding the referral criticism, but it is about what kind of referral criticism it is. If there really is a serious interest in this issue, I think more people should analyze the referral criticism. I can say this: Putting that proposal on the table in its current form would not have made life easier for crime victims in this country. That is also a reality.

We have taken those that we know have a great effect and that we can come forward with faster, and it is again the restraining orders, the rental protection, and the coercive measures - all that which has an extraordinarily great significance in all these respects.

We shall ensure that a broad criminal law approach will encompass the penalties, the rules for parole, and the rules for sentencing discounts also when it concerns the violence and the abuses that affect Sweden's women. We will expedite this, because there is a basis that allows us to do so. We will also come back to this.

I think that several of the questions that have emerged just in our exchange show that there are some very important issues to weigh, for example whether economic violence should be part of the regulation that hits psychological violence or if it needs to be handled in a special order, and also how the psychological violence can be approached in an accurate way that achieves the intended effect for the crime victims and cannot be used as a countermeasure from the perpetrator's side against the crime victim, who is usually a woman.

In my habitually very constructive spirit, I choose to focus on everything constructive that has emerged. There is a common will and ambition to move forward as quickly as possible in this area, and I dare say that for the country's victims of violence, it is extraordinarily important that psychological violence is criminalized, but that it is done in a way that also achieves the intended effect. It is my primary priority.

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

Åsa Eriksson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I shall try to continue in the constructive spirit.

Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I heard nothing more about economic consent legislation.

Let me say that the gross organized violence is a hostage for our society. How much suffering gangs cause, we have not least seen in the recent days' events in Skärholmen, which is so tragic that it is hardly possible to put into words.

An equally large problem is men's violence against women. For about a year now, the government has had a council against organized crime. I would therefore like to conclude by asking the Minister for Justice if the government intends to listen to civil society's demands and appoint a corresponding crisis council against men's serious crimes against women.

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

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Mr. Speaker! I am very well aware that there is much to be done in this area and also that the violence will not cease solely through a criminal liability for psychological violence. But I actually believe that it could work norm-forming if it is introduced with a clear plan for knowledge dissemination and methodological support.

A criminal liability clarifies that the person who has committed psychological violence is a perpetrator and that one also sees the risks of escalation with such behavior, as in the cases described in the Socialstyrelsen report or in the case of Tintin, who was forced into contact with his father despite there being clear information about psychological violence.

Stopping forced cohabitation is also an issue that is extremely urgent and something that is absolutely necessary, and I believe that psychological violence could play a role in risk assessments in investigations.

This is also about the right to redress for those who have been subjected to [abuse]. It is particularly important when it concerns children. They need to be believed and themselves receive an understanding that it is never their fault. The responsibility always lies with the perpetrator.

I want to conclude by thanking the Minister for Justice for the debate. It is positive once again that I notice a consensus somewhere. I also sense an increase in ambition from the government lately. It is pleasing that the Minister for Justice highlights the Contact Prohibition Inquiry, which our government appointed. Perhaps we can get a statement here on when the Minister for Justice believes it can be completed, which is also a very pressing issue.

We need to see more bills on the table. We also need to see funds for municipalities and regions and for civil society that meets the crime victims. The work against men's violence against women must not be sidelined. It must not take a break. It must be carried out in the whole of society at all levels. Anything else would be to betray Sweden's women and children.

(Applause)

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

Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Sanna Backeskog and Åsa Eriksson for the opportunity to discuss these extremely important issues today.

I also want to say that we are in very much agreement that the problems we are talking about, including those that are highlighted regarding psychological and economic violence, are such things that should not be legal in this country and that we should have a regulation that hits that violence. It is a regulation with great precision and that is associated with penalties that reflect the seriousness of these crimes and abuses. It is this work that is ongoing. I look forward to coming back to this and being pursued in the matter with appropriate frequency until this lies on the Riksdag's table.

I also want to conclude by highlighting some questions that were mentioned here earlier. We know that the average over a longer period has been 14 or perhaps 15 murdered women in a close relationship. In that case, one must say that the start of this year has been extraordinarily dark. It has once again brought the questions to the forefront.

I, together with Social Services Minister Waltersson Grönvall and Equality Minister Brandberg, had a meeting the week before last with representatives from authorities, municipalities, regions, the research community, and civil society. There we said, regarding the structured work moving forward, that we will find a format similar to this council recurring every twelve months with these parts of society in order to address these issues in a very operational way. We will also follow up on the reporting requirements that, for example, the police and prosecution authorities and others in my area have regarding these issues with a much higher frequency than what we normally see. This is to ensure that what also happens in our surrounding world leaves an impression in sharpness, tempo, and focus among all actors who have the conditions to influence the situation and ensure that fewer women than today are affected by violence in this horrific way.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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