Efter en rad grova våldsbrott föreslår regeringen en ny straffform kallad säkerhetsförvaring för personer med hög risk att återfalla i allvarliga brott. Justitieminister Gunnar Strömmer meddelade på en presskonferens att propositionen kan träda i kraft redan i april. Förslaget har stöd från både regeringen och oppositionen, men väcker kritik för att det straffar för brott som ännu inte begåtts.
Recent violent incidents in Sweden, including cases involving Fredrik Lundgren, known as Nytorgsmannen, who committed a rape while on parole, and suspects in murders in Boden and a dismemberment case linked to Vilma Andersson, have heightened public concern over recidivism. These events have fueled demands for tougher measures against dangerous offenders.
Research indicates that longer prison terms rarely deter crime and may even have the opposite effect, while early interventions in at-risk lives could be more effective, though they require time and resources. In response, the ruling Tidö parties have pushed for security detention, a form of indefinite imprisonment, gaining renewed momentum after holiday-season violence.
Even the Social Democrats support expediting the legislation. On Thursday, Strömmer stated that the government has decided on a proposition to address gaps in the current system, where high-risk individuals receive fixed sentences and are released regardless of ongoing danger, if they do not qualify for life imprisonment or psychiatric care.
"Vissa personer är så farliga att de inte bör släppas ut överhuvudtaget," Strömmer said. The measure targets adults over 18 who have reoffended in serious violent or sexual crimes, with assessments by the National Board of Forensic Medicine confirming substantial risk. Courts would set a minimum sentence, followed by a four-to-six-year extension period, reviewable every three years and potentially indefinite if the threat persists.
"Och när de sitter inne vågar alla andra vara ute," the minister added, emphasizing public safety. Critics argue it risks over-incarceration based on uncertain predictions of future behavior, echoing the repealed internment penalty from 1981, abolished for humanitarian reasons and forecasting challenges. Alternatives include expanding criteria for indefinite psychiatric care beyond severe mental illnesses to better protect society.
