Advanced

Bevisprövningsdilemman och snäva rekvisit i lagen (2012:663) om ersättning på grund av övergrepp och försummelser i samhällsvården av barn och unga i vissa fall - En rättssäkerhetsstudie

Segerlund, Erica LU (2014) JURM02 20141
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Den statligt tillsatta Vanvårdsutredningen konstaterade år 2010 att det under en stor del av 1900-talet förekommit många fall av allvarliga försummelser och övergrepp vid institutioner och familjehem inom den sociala barnavården. Med anledning av vad hade som presenterats tillsatte regeringen därefter Upprättelseutredningen med uppdrag att närmare utreda möjligheterna till upprättelse för de barn som utsattes för vanvård under tidsperioden 1920-1980. Upprättelseutredningen menade att det främst var samhället som bar ansvaret för den vanvård som hade ägt rum inom ramen för den sociala barnavården och att ett beviljande av en särskild statlig ersättning skulle utgöra ett viktigt led i en upprättelseprocess och ett erkännande av vad som hade... (More)
Den statligt tillsatta Vanvårdsutredningen konstaterade år 2010 att det under en stor del av 1900-talet förekommit många fall av allvarliga försummelser och övergrepp vid institutioner och familjehem inom den sociala barnavården. Med anledning av vad hade som presenterats tillsatte regeringen därefter Upprättelseutredningen med uppdrag att närmare utreda möjligheterna till upprättelse för de barn som utsattes för vanvård under tidsperioden 1920-1980. Upprättelseutredningen menade att det främst var samhället som bar ansvaret för den vanvård som hade ägt rum inom ramen för den sociala barnavården och att ett beviljande av en särskild statlig ersättning skulle utgöra ett viktigt led i en upprättelseprocess och ett erkännande av vad som hade hänt. Vidare anfördes att eventuella skadeståndsanspråk enligt normala ersättningsrättsliga principer i huvudsak skulle vara preskriberade till följd av den långa tidsperiod som förflutit sedan händelserna hade ägt rum varför möjligheterna för den enskilde att erhålla ersättning enligt skadeståndslagen skulle vara små.

Upprättelseutredningens förslag kom sedermera att resultera i införandet av lagen (2012:663) om ersättning på grund av övergrepp eller försummelser i samhällsvården av barn och unga i vissa fall. Denna nya ersättningslagstiftning trädde i kraft den 1 januari 2013 och ger den som varit omhändertagen för samhällsvård under perioden 1920-1980 rätt till ersättning om 250 000 kronor om det kan antas att han eller hon har utsatts för sådana övergrepp eller försummelser som är av allvarlig art i samband med vården.

Med hänsyn till risken för bevissvårigheter till följd av den många gånger långa tidsperiod som har förflutit sedan vanvården ägde rum uppställer den nya ersättningslagen inte samma krav på bevisning i jämförelse med den allmänna skadeståndsrätten. Detta resulterar emellertid i skillnader vid bevisprövningen beroende på om den enskilde omfattas av den nya ersättningslagen eller om denne faller utanför lagens tillämpningsområde.

Trots de lättnader, som således föreligger i bevishänseende, leder dock utformningen av de rekvisit som i övrigt ska vara uppfyllda till att nära hälften av alla inkomna ansökningar om ersättning får avslag. En anledning till att en så stor andel av ansökningarna leder till avslag är bland annat att den rådande samhällssynen på barnuppfostran under olika tidsperioder får betydelse för bedömningen av vad som ska anses utgöra vanvård av sådan allvarlig art som lagen kräver. Detta leder till att samma händelse kan bli föremål för olika bedömningar beroende på när i tiden denna ägde rum. Vidare tar inte lagen sikte på alla de fall av privata placeringar som länge var vanligt förekommande under 1900-talet. Slutligen omfattas inte heller sådana händelser som inte kan antas ha ett nära samband med vården av barnet eller som ägt rum senare än år 1980.

Sammantaget måste införandet av den nya ersättningslagen anses fylla en viktig funktion som ett erkännande och en ursäkt för de övergrepp och försummelser som så många barn utsattes för inom ramen för den sociala barnavården. Den problematik som kan föreligga rörande bevisprövning och lagens snävt utformade rekvisit medför dock att relevant lika fall de facto inte behandlas lika ifråga om de faktiska möjligheterna att erhålla ersättning. Denna omständighet kan ifrågasättas ur ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv och kommer att undersökas närmare inom ramen för denna framställning. (Less)
Abstract
In 2010, a commission, appointed by the Swedish government, found that serious neglect and abuse had been occurring within the public childcare system during the 20th century. As a result of these findings, a second commission was mandated to inquire the possibilities for restitution for all children who had experienced neglect or abuse between 1920 and 1980. The commission suggested that an economic compensation provided by the government would play an important part in the restitution process, as well as provide a public acknowledgement of the abuse that had occurred within the system. It also stated that any other claims for compensation according to the Swedish law on damages would essentially be statue-barred due to the long period of... (More)
In 2010, a commission, appointed by the Swedish government, found that serious neglect and abuse had been occurring within the public childcare system during the 20th century. As a result of these findings, a second commission was mandated to inquire the possibilities for restitution for all children who had experienced neglect or abuse between 1920 and 1980. The commission suggested that an economic compensation provided by the government would play an important part in the restitution process, as well as provide a public acknowledgement of the abuse that had occurred within the system. It also stated that any other claims for compensation according to the Swedish law on damages would essentially be statue-barred due to the long period of time that had passed since the occurring of these events.

The suggested economic compensation subsequently resulted in a new law coming in to force on 1 January 2013. This new law gives anyone who has been fostered and cared for within the public childcare system during 1920-1980, a right to an economic compensation of 250 000 SEK if it can be assumed that he or she had been subjected to abuse of a serious nature in connection with the care provided.

Due to the long period of time that has passed since the stated timeframe for compensation, the issue of presenting evidence proving the occurrence of abuse of a serious nature can prove difficult. Therefore, the new law does not require as much evidence in order to grant compensation as what is otherwise the norm according to the general law on damages. However, this has resulted in differences in the sifting of evidence depending on if the individual is covered by the new legislation or falls outside its scope.

In order to be granted compensation, the new law also stipulates a number of necessary conditions that have to be fulfilled in order for the individual to be granted compensation. Despite the alleviation regarding evidence, nearly half of all the applications for compensation are rejected due to the way these conditions have been formulated. Amongst other things, the varied public perception on children’s upbringing during different time periods has come to play an important part in the assessment of what should be viewed as such abuse that will entitle the individual to compensation. Depending on when the abuse took place, this will result in different assessments of the same event. Moreover, the new law does not cover private placements, something that was very common during the 20th century. Finally, the new law does not cover such events that are not viewed as having a connection with the public care provided for the child, nor does it cover such events that have taken place past 1980.

On the one hand, taking all these issues into consideration, the enacting of the new law must be considered important as a public apology and an acknowledgement by the state of the neglect and abuse that so many children were subjected to within the public childcare system during a large part of the 20th century. On the other hand, the new law can be considered problematic with regard to the sifting of evidence and the way in which the necessary conditions have been formulated. Cases, which can be viewed as identical, will therefore not be treated in the same way in regards to the actual possibility for the individual to acquire compensation. This can be questioned from a broader perspective based on the rule of law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Segerlund, Erica LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
A Swedish legislation dilemma concerning the granting of compensation to children subjected to abuse within the public childcare system
course
JURM02 20141
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
civilrätt, socialrätt, skadestånd, bevisprövning
language
Swedish
id
4450893
date added to LUP
2014-06-12 09:00:34
date last changed
2014-06-12 09:00:34
@misc{4450893,
  abstract     = {In 2010, a commission, appointed by the Swedish government, found that serious neglect and abuse had been occurring within the public childcare system during the 20th century. As a result of these findings, a second commission was mandated to inquire the possibilities for restitution for all children who had experienced neglect or abuse between 1920 and 1980. The commission suggested that an economic compensation provided by the government would play an important part in the restitution process, as well as provide a public acknowledgement of the abuse that had occurred within the system. It also stated that any other claims for compensation according to the Swedish law on damages would essentially be statue-barred due to the long period of time that had passed since the occurring of these events. 

The suggested economic compensation subsequently resulted in a new law coming in to force on 1 January 2013. This new law gives anyone who has been fostered and cared for within the public childcare system during 1920-1980, a right to an economic compensation of 250 000 SEK if it can be assumed that he or she had been subjected to abuse of a serious nature in connection with the care provided. 

Due to the long period of time that has passed since the stated timeframe for compensation, the issue of presenting evidence proving the occurrence of abuse of a serious nature can prove difficult. Therefore, the new law does not require as much evidence in order to grant compensation as what is otherwise the norm according to the general law on damages. However, this has resulted in differences in the sifting of evidence depending on if the individual is covered by the new legislation or falls outside its scope. 

In order to be granted compensation, the new law also stipulates a number of necessary conditions that have to be fulfilled in order for the individual to be granted compensation. Despite the alleviation regarding evidence, nearly half of all the applications for compensation are rejected due to the way these conditions have been formulated. Amongst other things, the varied public perception on children’s upbringing during different time periods has come to play an important part in the assessment of what should be viewed as such abuse that will entitle the individual to compensation. Depending on when the abuse took place, this will result in different assessments of the same event. Moreover, the new law does not cover private placements, something that was very common during the 20th century. Finally, the new law does not cover such events that are not viewed as having a connection with the public care provided for the child, nor does it cover such events that have taken place past 1980.

On the one hand, taking all these issues into consideration, the enacting of the new law must be considered important as a public apology and an acknowledgement by the state of the neglect and abuse that so many children were subjected to within the public childcare system during a large part of the 20th century. On the other hand, the new law can be considered problematic with regard to the sifting of evidence and the way in which the necessary conditions have been formulated. Cases, which can be viewed as identical, will therefore not be treated in the same way in regards to the actual possibility for the individual to acquire compensation. This can be questioned from a broader perspective based on the rule of law.},
  author       = {Segerlund, Erica},
  keyword      = {civilrätt,socialrätt,skadestånd,bevisprövning},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Bevisprövningsdilemman och snäva rekvisit i lagen (2012:663) om ersättning på grund av övergrepp och försummelser i samhällsvården av barn och unga i vissa fall - En rättssäkerhetsstudie},
  year         = {2014},
}