CAT/C/SWE/CO/6-7
5.
The Committee welcomes the following legislative and other measures taken by the
State party in areas of relevance to the Convention:
(a)
The entry into force of the Act on Criminal Responsibility for Genocide,
Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, on 1 July 2014;
(b)
The entry into force of the new Anti-Discrimination Act, on 1 January 2009;
(c)
The efforts made to comply with the obligations under article 22 of the
Convention.
C.
Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
Definition and criminalization of torture and the statute of limitations
6.
The Committee welcomes the fact that an inquiry was commissioned in June 2014
to consider the need for a specific provision on torture in Swedish penal law. The
Committee expresses its continuing concern that the State party has not yet specifically
incorporated the crime of torture, as defined in article 1 of the Convention, into domestic
law. The absence of torture as a criminal offence creates actual or potential loopholes for
impunity and obstructs the victim’s capacity to access and enjoy his or her rights
guaranteed in the Convention. Further, the Committee is concerned that the offence of
torture,which is subsumed in the offence of assault and aggravated assault, is subject to a
statute of limitations on that account in Swedish legislation (arts. 1 and 4).
The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation (CAT/C/SWE/CO/5, para. 9)
and urges the State party, as a matter of priority, to define and criminalize torture in
domestic law, in full compliance with articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. Recalling its
general comment No. 2 (2007) on the implementation of article 2 by States parties, the
Committee considers that by naming and defining the offence of torture in accordance
with the terms of the Convention, as distinct from other crimes, States parties will
directly advance the overarching aim of the Convention to prevent torture, inter alia,
by alerting everyone, including perpetrators, victims and the public, to the special
gravity of the crime of torture, and by improving the deterrent effect of the
prohibition itself. Furthermore, the State party should ensure that acts amounting to
torture, as defined in article 1 of the Convention, are not subject to any statute of
limitations in its law.
Fundamental legal safeguards
7.
While taking note of the new Act on Detention (2010:611) regulating procedures for
arrest and temporary detention in custody or other detention facilities, the Committee
remains concerned that persons deprived of their liberty, including minors, are not always
afforded all fundamental legal safeguards from the very outset of deprivation of liberty,
such as the rights to access to a lawyer, to independent medical examination and to notify a
relative or a person of their choice. The Committee is concerned at reports that the right of
notification of custody is often unduly delayed in the interests of the investigation and that
access to health care for persons in police custody continues to be left to the discretion of
the police (art. 2).
Recalling the Committee’s general comment No. 2, the State party should take all
necessary measures to ensure that all persons deprived of their liberty are afforded, in
law and in practice, all the fundamental legal safeguards from the very outset of
deprivation of liberty, in particular the right to access to a lawyer, the right to a
medical examination by an independent doctor, preferably of their own choice, and
the right to notify a relative, in accordance with the international standards.
2