Sweden, Swedish Prosecution Authority, (Åklagarmyndigheten), Supervision report 2016:1 Hate crime - a review of the prosecutors' processing, (Tillsynsrapport 2016:1 Hatbrott – en granskning av åklagarnas handläggning, ÄM-A 2014/1799) Malmö Development Ce

Country

Sweden

Title

Sweden, Swedish Prosecution Authority, (Åklagarmyndigheten), Supervision report 2016:1 Hate crime - a review of the prosecutors' processing, (Tillsynsrapport 2016:1 Hatbrott – en granskning av åklagarnas handläggning, ÄM-A 2014/1799) Malmö Development Centre

View full Research

Year

2016

Type of publication

Report

Geographical coverage

National

Area/location of interest

Not applicable - national level

Type of Institution

Public authority

Institution

Swedish Prosecution Authority | Åklagarmyndigheten

Main Thematic Focus

Hate crime

Target Population

General population

Key findings

The report analyses the prosecutors' processing of hate crimes to find what kind of crimes are reported as hate crimes, and whether the hate crime motives are noted and investigated to the extent possible. Only 15 – 20 percent of the cases in the material are followed up with a legal action. The study shows that defamation crimes, i.e. slander and insults were the most common hate crimes. In cases where charges have been made and the hate crime motive has been established by a court, this aggravating circumstance has influenced the meeting out of the punishment – with only a few exceptions. The report underlines the accuracy and quality of the preliminary hearings must improve.

Methodology (Qualitative/Quantitative and exact type used, questionnaires etc)

A qualitative-based examination (granskning) of 300 hate crimes reported during 2013 collected from the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brottsförebyggande rådet, BRÅ) database, which have been processed by a prosecutor.

Sample details and representativeness

The total number of cases with a hate crime motive that had been processed by a prosecutor during 2013 was 892. 300 of these cases were selected as a representative sample of the larger group. The sample included cases geographically spread across the country and cases that have been handled by both larger and smaller local public prosecution offices (åklagarkammare). These 300 cases were examined in more detail.

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.