In a referral to the Council on Legislation, the Government proposes legislative amendments to make it easier to issue contact bans for a violent ex-partner.
Today's legislation has significant shortcomings, says Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer (M).
The National Audit Office has pointed out that barely one-third of all applications lead to the prosecutor deciding on a contact ban.
The whole purpose of this reform is to get more contact bans, says Strömmer.
Without a verdict
Most often, it's about protecting a woman who is being stalked by her former partner.
Among other things, it is now proposed that more circumstances than today can lead to a contact ban, even in cases where the ex-partner has not been convicted of a crime. And in cases where there is a verdict for a serious crime against a close relative, a contact ban should be the main rule.
Two new reasons for issuing a contact ban are also proposed. If the man has been monitoring the woman using GPS equipment or apps, or to protect the plaintiff or witnesses in a legal process.
The Government also believes that extended contact bans cover too small areas.
Today, the prosecutor can decide on extended contact bans, which often cover the protected person's home or workplace. It can be combined with electronic surveillance. A specially extended contact ban can cover a larger area.
Minister for Gender Equality Paulina Brandberg (L) notes, however, that it has so far mostly been about a residential area.
Entire municipality
Now, the Government proposes that a specially extended contact ban can be issued directly without a prior extended contact ban being used. It should also be able to cover a larger area, such as an entire municipality or even larger.
Brandberg points out that the area needs to be large enough for the police to be able to respond to violations, even in parts of the country where police stations are far apart.
The Chancellor of Justice has, however, warned that large geographical areas may imply a restriction on the constitutionally protected freedom of movement.
Often, the alternative is that the person who is a victim of a crime has to move and change jobs. This government believes that it is the one who harasses who should have their freedom restricted, says Brandberg.
The legislative amendments are proposed to come into force on July 1, 2025.
Two new grounds for issuing a contact ban:
* If there is a risk of unauthorized surveillance using GPS equipment or apps.
* If there is a risk of someone trying to influence a legal process.
Circumstances other than previous criminality will be given greater importance when assessing the need for a contact ban.
If a serious crime has been committed in a close relationship, a contact ban should be the main rule.
The crime should then have a penalty value of at least six months, or concern illegal harassment or honor-related oppression.
A specially extended contact ban can be issued as a first-hand measure.
Extended and specially extended contact bans can cover larger areas.
Stricter penalties for violating an extended or specially extended contact ban without electronic surveillance, from one year to a maximum of two years.
Source: Ministry of Justice
