THE STUDY VISIT ( 24.03 – 29.03.2019)

(5-day study trip, Sweden, 10 participants from Bulgaria, 2 from CRD, for good practices exchange)

MOTIVATION AND SCOPE OF THE WP3

Trans-border capacity building of public bodies and civil society to address hate crimes. Good practices sharing in tackling hate crimes. (Months: 3-5)

THE STUDY VISIT TO STOCKHOLM ( 24.03-29- 03.2019)

Provisionally the study trip (5-day study trip, Sweden, 10 participants from Bulgaria, 2 from CRD, for good practices exchange) should take place in months 1-3 of 2019 and by April 2019. BHC was responsible for the identification of domestic participants. CRD was responsible for the design of the study trip program.

The capacity building study trip to Sweden was organised by CRD, Stockholm. CRD  designed the study trip for Bulgarian representatives from public stakeholders (6) engaged in minority protection and 4 representatives of NGOs to acquaint themselves with the experience in Sweden to tackle hate crimes.

The Study Trip to Stockholm introduced the participants to several institutions in Sweden, including

the Swedish Police, Cyber Hate Crime Monitor /Naethatsgranscaren/, Swedish Government Offices – Ministry of Justice, Ministry of  Culture, Social Ministry, Living History Forum, Chancellor of Justice, District Court, Local Public Prosecution Office,  Crime Victim Compemsation and Support Authority and civil society organisations. The Bulgarian participants  had the chance to learn about how these institutions work individually and in coordination to combat hate crime, their implemented measures and their strategies for future action.

See Final Study Trip Programme in Annex 1.

THE STUDY VISIT TO STOCKHOLM – OVERVIEW

In the frame of the 5-day study visit ( 25 -29 March 2019) the 10 participants from Bulgaria had a chance to take  part in  9 meetings  ( CRD, The Swedish Police Authority Headquaters, Cyber Hate Crime Monitor /Naethatsgranscaren/, visit by Diana Nyman – Roma activist, Swedish Government Offices – Ministry of Justice, Ministry of  Culture, Social Ministry, Living History Forum, Chancellor of Justice, District Court, Local Public Prosecution Office),  1 dialogue via video with Crime Victim Compemsation and Support Authority and 1 panel discussion on hate crimes with representatives from civil society organisations.

CRD has not been able to arrange a visit at the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå), as it was originally planned. This was due to the fact that the authority was currently going through a lot of organizational changes, and therefore CRD were told that they did not have the capacity to arrange a visit. However, the partners from the CRD have done their best , so the work and role of the authority was covered during our visits to other authorities who collaborate with Brå. The Bulgarian participants received detailed informationa and  a last final report of the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå) – Hate Crime 2016.Statisticson police reports with identified hate crime motives and self – reported exposure to hate crime.

Most visits were going to be 1,5h with 1h planned for  presentation from the representatives of the authority and 30min planned for a discussion between the participants and the representatives – the participants  asked questions and shared their experiences.

The main topics of the study trip agenda were: Introduction –  presentation by CRD; The work of the Swedish police against hate crimes; The work at the non-profit organization Cyber Hate Crime Monitor; the Swedish  government’s White Paper on Abuses and Rights Violations Against Roma in the 20^th Century; The work of the Swidisch Gowernment /Ministry of Justice, Social Ministry and Ministry of Culture/ in combating hate crimes;The work of Living History Forum, a Swedish public authority with issues on tolerance, democracy and human rights;  Helen Ziobro, reporting clerk at the Chancellor of Justice, presents the work of the Chancellor of Justice against hate crimes in the context of cases concerning offences against the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression; The role of Swedish courts in combatting hate crimes, with a subsequent discussion about challenges in this area; The role of special prosecutors in combatting hate crimes, with a subsequent discussion about challenges in prosecuting hate crimes.A dialogue via video link with a desk officer at the Crime Victim Compensation and  Support Authority maintained the work of the authority in the area of hate crimes.The Study visit to Sweden included  the Panel Discussion on Hate Crimes  – representatives from civil society organisations (CRD, ROMA grassroots NGO,  AI and Cyber Hate Crimes Monitor) and Bulgarian participants  discussed challenges in the work against hate crimes in Sweden. The Study visit to Sweden was concluded   with reflections about the participants’ experience of the study visit in relation to their expectations.

The 10 participants from Bulgaria were accompanied by two participants from CRD to all of the visits.

See Attendance lists of the participants in Annex 2

THE STUDY VISIT TO STOCKHOLM – ACCENTS 

INTRODUCTION AT CIVIL RIGHTS DEFENDERS

25 March, Civil Rights Defenders Office

Place:  Civil Rights Defenders Office, Sergels torg 12

Interpretations: Anders Pettersson, Civil Rights Defenders’ Executive Director  and John Stauffer, Legal Director at the Legal department

Anders Pettersson, Civil Rights Defenders’ Executive Director, presented CRD and what the organiza­tion does. A question was asked whether there is a political attitude against us. The answer is yes, for example CRD has stood up for Roma rights and Jewish communities who have been  target of hate crimes, which has made CRD unpopular with many right-wing organizations. Anders was also asked about  Natalia project, and talked a bit about that.  Natalia project is a project funded by Civil Rights Defenders which provides human rights defenders at risk with an alarm system that they can use when­ever they are at risk of being abducted or harmed. When they press the alarm, a signal goes directly to the office of CRD, which can act fast and alert their families and the world about what happened.

John Stauffer, Legal Director at the Legal department, then continued with a more detailed presenta­­tion about Civil Rights Defenders, how the organization is built up and talked more about what CRD does, especially the work in the area of hate crimes. He talked for instance about CRD’s work against right-wing organizations such as the Nordic Resistance Movement, the work in the area of ethnic pro­filing and discrimination and the case CRD won against the Swedish state concerning a Roma register that the police force in southern Sweden had erected. CRD won the case and it was turned into a pilot case where all of the victims in the register were given compensation.

VISIT AT THE STOCKHOLM POLICE DEMOCRACY AND HATE CRIME GROUP

25 March, The Stockholm Police

Place: The Swedish Police Authority Headquarters, Norra Agnegatan 33–36

Interpretations : Sara Isaksson, Jonas Jonzon, Göran Stanton, investigators at the Stockholm Police Democracy and Hate Crime Group

Sara Isaksson, Jonas Jonzon, Göran Stanton, investigators at the Stockholm Police democracy and hate crime Group, presented the work of the Swedish Police against hate crimes

Göran Stanton: History of the hate crime unit: The hate crime group started on June 5^th, 2007.Because June 6^th  is Sweden’s national day with a lot of extremists going out demonstrating. Very successful project – 2009 the chief commissioner it became permanent à hate crime unit was created, working only in Stockholm city. In  2017 it became regional. Cooperation with muslims, some Islam groups, Jewish group, Roma group, Afroswede group and gay rights group. Many who started working also worked for the gay police association. Invited journalists to Stockholm Pride – from Russia, Belarus, Albania, China, Japan and so forth. LGBT Sweden – important was that  a lot of high bosses join the march (“you don’t need to be gay to work with the issues”. ) LGBT International  – 2016 Klas and a collegue went to Sofia Pride. 2017 – from the city to the entire county = had to work with democracy. Norms in the police: In Sweden: white Swedish heterosexual man. Important to work with the norms (“because we fight for democracy in peace times”).  There are lot of different religions and ethnicities in Sweden – the police have to work so more people want to be police officers. Have to take care of each other. Transgender in the police: More transgender people are coming out, and we have transgender people in the Swedish police. Important to get other transgender people to want to join the police. The police museum is doing an exhibition about LGBT.

Sara Isaksson: Hate crime unit: Work to identify hate crimes – so everyone knows how to do it, gives professional treatment to victims of hate crime. Educates externally, and work with other organizations with the purpose to increase their confidence in the police. Improve people and the groups trust in the police. What is a hate crime? It means an increase in severity of a punishment, as stated in the penal code. Need another crime to happen – for example assault with the motive of hate crime. Also investigates discrimination cases and hate speech.

Tips to police colleagues: Dare to ask: Important to give professional impression and ask victims of the crime. For example: why they think they’ve been subjected to the crime. A way to discover if it is a hate crime + for the police to show that they value the victims own experience. Do no minimize the event: They might be experiencing it worse because of the: Mind the language – Avoiding words that might be outdated for example; Mind the risk of secondary victimization – Never question the victim’s behaviour, for example why they were there or what they were wearing.

Why are hate crimes not reported? If one is subjected to something every day, it is too much to report every single action. Also: normalisation can play a part. Important with a professional approach

Hate speech online: The last 2 years: large increase in reported online hate speech (when you say ocr writes).The increase of reports is part of the näthatsgranskarna (started reporting 2 years ago) – this led to a lot of work for this police unit. Challenges: social media platforms based in the US – difficult to get informations of users (it needs to be a crime in the US as well). Prosecutors and courts have also been inexperienced-

Statistics: BRÅ – national to:

• Statistics of reported crimes, also make reports: especially one about hate crime. (the power point slide is from that report 2016, published 2017)
• A lot of crimes go unreported – might be more hate crimes than in the statistics
• Mattias Gardell: one of Swedish researchers who know Islam very well: a lot of 90-95% Muslims don’t report hate crimes they are subjected to
• Survey 15 -17 years old: if you feel bad because you are LGBT – 25% does (sent out to 30 000 kids who went to school – do you think they treat you bad because they think you are gay)
• Much more hate crimes than the numbers say – because so many don’t report it
• When police report: “is this a hate crime” and then BRÅ looks at every report that says “yes”. No direct collaboration, but BRÅ looks at police reports.
• The police meet BRÅ once or twice a year. The journalists no longer call and ask about the report – they can see that the interest is going down while society is becoming more conservative.

Roma mapping in south of Sweden: CRD took the case to court. Important is that the police learns from it and how, and what, they should do in the future. Since 2007 when the hate crime project started in Stockholm (2011 Malmö was only one person) they had this. Often takes a long time to go through these changes, because the police is quite conservative. Change has been made regarding LGBT, but now they have to change regarding immigrants.

There are three hate crime units in Sweden – Stockholm, Malmö, Göteborg –it  was mentioned that  all regions should have a hate crime unit. The northern department covers a big area, and one question is where they would put the unit. A problem is that the work becomes less effective in areas where there is no hate crime unit.

Q&A:

Do you collaborate with NGOs? Do you need permission from superiors to work with NGOs?

“RFSL (gay rights association) we meet them twice a year, and used to participate with them in seminars. The Islamic group: participate in Muslim family days every Easter. The Jewish association: meet once or twice a year. Trying to get back in contact with the Roma group. Also  with the Afroswedes  group. Our aim is to have regular meetings with people from these groups 1 or 2 a year. They don’t need permission from superiors, they’re free to reach out and work with any groups within this are.”

Do you have any methodological guidelines regarding investigation of hate crimes?

“It depends, before you talk to the perpetrator, you write down your own questions. Can they prove it? The police and prosecutor have to prove it to almost 100%, because otherwise the court prefers to release rather than convict. Otherwise,  there are no methodological guidelines.”

Have you seen an increase in reports in these groups since working with them?

“Difficult, one might think all the numbers should go up. In these days, lgbt groups don’t have any trust for the police because catch 22 – NMR demonstrates and the police gave them right to demonstrate outside RFSL office on Gotland. In the last Stockholm Pride the police got the worst price. A problem is that it is not forbidden with organisation like NMR. LGBT groups like the hate crime unit, but not the rest of the organisation.”

How do you overcome hate speech against the police on radio or television?

“You’re allowed to say you don’t like the police, but not say like “all police are Nazis”. The legislation of hate speech only covers certain groups, and the police is not a part of the legislation. You’re allowed to criticize the police.”

What are the main challenges you face in your work? For example, so many incoming complaints, but so few prosecutions? What good practices do you see in your work?

“Two: one is the evidence – to have good evidence to support or prove the crime is the main thing. Both IRL and on the internet. In the future they’ll have a lot more tools. Change the law to make it easier to get proof, for example so someone can’t say that they don’t know who did it.”

Good practice: to have groups like these in Stockholm, Malmö, Göteborg is good. To know that other areas aren’t able to prioritize hate crimes like here. To be able to prioritize is a big and important part of it. People higher up in the hierarchy have said it’s a prioritized question, which is why we have three groups now. Someone higher up made the decision. Before 2003 sexual orientation wasn’t part of the hate speech legislation. 1994 aggression: race, religious background and other circumstances.2002: sexual orientation. 2018: gender identity 

VISIT BY KAJSA KLEIN FROM NÄTHATSGRANSKAREN (CYBER HATE CRIME MONITOR)

25 March, Civil Rights Defenders Office

Place: Civil Rights Defenders Office, Sergels torg 12

Interpretations: Kajsa Klein from NÄTHATSGRANSKAREN (CYBER HATE CRIME MONITOR)

Kajsa Klein has been working in both academia and activism; she is an expert in internet and decided to take on all the problems they saw with hate crimes online. She first joined I’m here (#jagärhär), a movement to combat hate on the Internet, and since November 2018 she works at Näthatsgranskaren (the Cyber Hate Crime Monitor).She asked the participants of their use of social media, and whether they personally have experience in being victims of hate crimes. Kajsa then talked about Näthatsgranskaren, started by ex-policemen and IT specialists, 1200 police reports up until now, 170 reports led to convictions which are very high number. Before that, there were no convictions. What is the secret to the success? One reason is competence, they have ex-policemen writing police reports, they know how the police work. They developed a method for finding hate crimes online. Thomas Åberg, a colleague of Kajsa, is also very stubborn, he follows up on all the investigations. Most convictions have been from Facebook groups, particularly one group – Stå upp för Sverige (Stand up for Sweden).

Power Point presentation about Näthatsgranskaren:
https://rm.coe.int/panel-2-4-aberg-the-internet-hate-monitor/16808ee50d

Information about Näthatsgranskaren in English on their webpage:
http://näthatsgranskaren.se/the-hate-generator/

Article in English about Näthatsgranskaren:
https://liu.se/en/news-item/polisen-misslyckas-med-att-losa-hatbrott-pa-natet

On Tuesday 26 March the bg delegation had 3 visits.

Visit by Diana Nyman, Roma activist

26 March, Diana Nyman, Roma activist

Place: Time Law Firm Office, Biblioteksgatan 11

Interpretation: Diana Nyman

The visit at  Time Law Firm Office, Biblioteksgatan 11,Stockholm).Diana Nyman, former delegate of the Commission Against Antiziganism and special adviser in Roma issues, presented her work with the Swedish government’s White Paper on Abuses and Rights Violations Against Roma in the 20^th Century. 

Visit at the Swedish Government Offices

26 March,   Ministry of Justice, Herkulesgatan 17

Place:  Ministry of Justice, Herkulesgatan 17, Stockhom

Interpretations: Representatives of Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Culture

This  was the second meeting for trhe day. Representatives from the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Culture presented  the work of the Swedish government in combatting hate crimes. The accents of the presentations are: The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention and statistics (A knowledge centre for the criminal justice system)  ; Swedish legislation regarding hate crime and Discrimination;  Agency governance.

It was underlined that there are in Sweden three  key  strategic documents  in the field of combating hate crimes:

The national plan to combat racism, similar forms of hostility and hate crime[1] (Adopted in November 2016; Objective: strategic, effective and coherent work to combat racism, similar forms of hostility and hate crime in Sweden; Comprehensive approach and also targeted approach /Afrophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-Gypsyism, Islamophobia, racism against Sami, homophobia, biphobia and transphobia/; Funding/year: EUR 2 100 000 – 2 900 000). The plan is to form a basis and a focus for work to combat racism and hate crime in the particularly important strategic areas identified by the Government. The plan sets out a structure for coordination and follow-up which lays the groundwork for long-term strategic work. Strategic areas of the the National plan to combat racism, similar forms of hostility and hate crime are: Improved coordination and monitoring; More knowledge, education and research; Civil society: greater support and more in-depth dialogue; Strengthening preventive measures online; A more active legal system; Living history forum – Responsible for coordination and monitoring of the plan; Exchange of experiences, dissemination of knowledge and information. Some practical mesures :  Living history forum: extensive training initiative about racism and similar forms of hostility; Several measures within the legal system; Swedish Media Council implements the No Hate Speech Movement campaign; More funding to civil society projects; More dialogue with civil society; Several targeted measures.

Download:A comprehensive approach to combat racism and hate crime (pdf 2 MB)

National strategy for Roma inclusion[2] (The overall goal: a Roma who turns 20 years in 2032 is to have the same opportunitiesin life as a non-Roma; A strengthening of the minorities policy; Human rights and the principle ofnon-discrimination;  Assignments to several public agencies; Pilot scheme at municipal level); National strategy for Roma inclusion –  Ministry of Culture:  White Paper on abuses and rights violations of Roma during the 1900s;Commission against anti-Gypsyism; Inquiry on how to establish a national center for Roma issues.Funding/year: 1 400 000 – 1 500 000 EUR);

National strategy for LGBT equality[3] (A long term strategy for LGBT equality was introduced in 2014. It is a platform for a more joint up approach and it gives a clearer role and mandate to some strategic agencies. There has been a lot of development in this areasince the strategy was introduced and new initiatives has been introduced on yearly basis Inquiry on situation of transgender persons). There are some good examples that  have been given instigated by the state  : Examples of legal changes since 2014 (Compensation to persons who have been affected by the repealed sterilization requirement in the Legal Gender recognition; Extended protection under criminal law for transgender people; Also, the government is currently revising the law related to gender recognition). Examples of policy measures since 2014(New agencies with a strategic LGBT remit Information and guidance for the care and treatment of persons with intersex conditions; Open, inclusive schooling for LGBT persons; Increased reporting of hate crimes amongst transgender persons; Better knowledge about violence affecting LGBT people; Victim support services for LGBT persons; Suicide prevention focusing on transgender persons.

Visit at the Living History Forum

(15:00–16:45,   Living History Forum, Stora Nygatan 10–12)

26 March,Visit at the Living History Forum

Place: Living History Forum, Stora Nygatan 10–12

Interpretations: Ingrid Lomfors – Living History Forum

The representatives of the Swedish public authority[4] presented their  works with issues on tolerance,

democracy and human rights.

VISIT AT THE SÖDERTÖRN DICTRICT COURT

27 march, The District Court of Södertörn

Place: Södertörn District Court, Björnkullavägen 5A, Huddinge

Interpretations: Karin Pale-Bartes (judge) and Anna Olsson (Junior judge)

Karin Påle-Bartes (judge) and Anna Olsson (Junior judge) presented   the role of Swedish courts in combatting hate crimes, with a subsequent discussion about challenges in this area.          

The Karin Påle-Bartes has not much experience with hate crime cases: „If I can find a motive in a criminal case – no matter the case – than I can raise the penalty, because the motive is there. Problematic: sometimes it’s hard to prove the motive of the crime. For example: if someone’s beaten up – is there a racial motive, or are they angry with someone? It can be difficult to know. The agitation against a national or ethnic group in Sweden is   6 months – 4 years in prison. Some of these cases today are committed on the internet à the prosecutor has the need of having it written down. The problem can be who wrote it? You often don’t use your own name, or you can say that you weren’t the one writing it down. Regarding hate, internet is like opening pandora’s box. Unlawful discrimination. You need a good case to be able to convict someone.”

Fundamental principles:

The role of the judge: It’s quite limited. It’s up to the prosecutor and defendant to give the facts of the case: the judge has done no previous investigation, but the parties are to present all facts.  It is important what the parties say in the court – if they’ve said different things to the police and the court, it’s up to the party to ask if they can read what the party said previously, with the police or someone else. The judge depends on the material that’s given in the courtroom. When finished, you have one or two weeks before the written judgement. After this, the memory of the judge will fade.  The prosecutor has the burden of proof. (beyond reasonable doubt).It’s quite common to only give a written judgement and not an oral one beforehand, if the judge and laymen needs more time for example. It’s possible to give the verdict orally another day, but it’s usually not done. Perhaps if someone is really young etc (depends on the circumstances). Can the court initiate gathering additional evidence: they can call forth sakkunniga (specialists) it’s possible, but overall it doesn’t happen. You could bring in other witnesses if in positive for the defendant, but this doesn’t happen because the defence is good enough to cover everything.

Statistics:

The latest statistics from BRÅ is from 2016 : Xenophobic/racist hate crime motives are most common. 2016: 6400 reports made to the police. Important to keep in mind that the most marginalized people don’t go to the police – the statistics only cover those crimes that were reported. Hate crimes are dealt with in all courts. When aggravating circumstances, the court should report it. But it’s hard to find a system to do it.

Petty crimes: spreading things to others, one circumstance can be how many heard it. For example, someone who said “sieg heil” but ‘only’ ten or eleven people heard them.

The punishment is proportionate to the crime committed. Most judges are white and do not have the experiences of a minority – if you haven’t looked at the damages of a hate crime, the punishments are a bit lenient. This is a debate that is needed in every country, and especially in Sweden where the basis is “what kind of harm did you do”.

Aggravating circumstances:

A problem to prove the motive, it can be quite difficult. If the prosecutor does not think there is a case, he won’t take the case to court. The court is the last stop of the line, and they have very few cases with these crimes. Surprising concern what happens in society every day.

When using social media, the court knows some topics might become discussions on social media. That site shows the court what can happen and be written on the internet.

After a case regarding gang rape, they received a lot of emails and had to close down the Facebook page for a while because there were so many racist comments. Still so few cases go to court because of the proof problem. Also cases regarding cases of hate crime against Roma people begging, but it’s still difficult to prove that it was a hate crime and had a hate motive.

Q&A:

Can the problem be solved by changing the law somehow?

“It’s usually the lack of evidence. Even with perfect laws, if you don’t take a strong point against racism for example already in school it will still be a problem. It needs to be worked with on many different levels.”

Would You take a decision outside evidence, based on public opinion and on a feeling of fairness?

“No, that would be illegal.”

Do the public opinion respect judges?

“Sometimes, the pressure today is higher than five, six years ago. For example a rape case a judge decided the evidence wasn’t enough – she was threatened, it was written about in media, there were demonstrations in Stockholm even before the verdict. They should not be affected, but at least unconsciously, it does affect. This is important to talk about, between people and between judges. We need witnesses and for people to feel responsible, instead of staying silent. The court deals with civil cases as well regarding unlawful discrimination. Evidence through special surveillance.”

VISIT AT THE SÖDERORT LOCAL PUBLIC PROSECUTION OFFICE

27 March, The Söderort Local Public Prosecution Office

Place: Söderort Local Public Prosecution Office, Björnkullavägen 7, Huddinge                  

Interpretators: Magnus Ramebäck via Skype, Tove Kullberg

Magnus Ramebäck via Skype, Tove Kullberg presented  the role of special prosecutors in combatting hate crimes, with a subsequent discussion about challenges in prosecuting hate crimes.

DIALOGUE WITH CRIME VICTIM COMPENSATION AND SUPPORT AUTHORITY (CVCSA)

28 March, Dialogue with Crime Victim Compensation and Support Authority via video
 Place: Civil Rights Defenders Office, Sergels torg 12
 Interpretator:   Fredric Celin

The dialogue via video link with Fredric Celin ,  a desk officer  at the Crime Victim Compensation and  Support Authority was  about the work of the authority in the area of hate crimes.

The Authority in short: Established in 1994, located in Umeå. Staff –about 60 persons.Budget –approximately 45 million SEK.Governmental organization, subordinate to the Ministry of Justice and led by a Director-General. National responsibilities:Criminal injuries compensation –state compensation to crime victims;The Crime Victim Fund;Centre of Competence.

Statistics on hate crime in Sweden:Gathered by The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, 6 415 police reports in 2016. Most common are homophobic and then islamophobichate crimes.

Self reported exposure to hate crime –1,6 % of the Swedish population (2014-2016). Self reported homophobic hate crimes –about 0,2-0,3 % and anti-religious hate crimes about 0,5 % of the Swedish population. Most common xenophobic hate crimes – about 1,3 %.

The Crime Victim Fund: Established in 1994.Financed by a special fine from offenders (800 SEK) and those serving and those serving their sentences using intensive supervision with electronic monitoring (maximum 9 600 SEK). Support projects, research and NGOs.Budget approximately 40 million SEK. Funding of projects on hate crime:Annual grant to RFSL and their Support Service to LGBTQ people who have experienced hate crime; Research on for example how hate crime affects the victims and self-reported hate crime victimization amongst Swedish university students; Training (NGOs).

Centre of Competence :Gathering and distributing information and results of research;Arranging conferences and seminars; Education for legal authorities, NGOs and others;Newsletters, folders, reports; Responsible together with The National Courts Administration and in close cooperation with Victim Support for the witness service; Governmental commissions and projects; International projects; Web pages.

Hate No More – an international project (2016-2018): Led by APAV (Portuguese Association for Victim Support);CVCSA project partner together with NGOs from United Kingdom, Italy, Austria and Malta; Financed by the European Commission. Aimed to train professionals on consequences for hate crime victims’ response and how to support them. Created a training manual and a handbook. Two training sessions in Sweden (Stockholm and Malmö).Campaign and leaflets.

Criminal injuries compensation (or state compensation to crime victims): Administrated by CVCSA:

About 10 000 applications per year.In 2018 90 million SEK were paid to crime victims.State funded and part of the budget of the Ministry of Justice (tax money).Applicable to victims of criminal offences.The crime must be reported to the police.Claims must be made within three years (a child can apply until the age of 21 years old) from the time a judgement or a final decision has gained legal force (court’s verdict or the conclusion of the preliminary investigation). Only granted if there’s no possibility to receive compensation from other sources:Damages from  convicted perpetrator;

Compensation from an insurance; Possible to receive compensation if the perpetrator is

What’s covered by the compensation?

Costs for medical care and hospitalisation.Damage to some property (clothes and glasses that a crime victim wore when a violent crime was committed).Loss of earnings.Pain and suffering. Permanent disability.Scars and disfigurements.Violation of personal integrity (“moral damage”).Compensation for property crimes –ONLY if the offender

Violation of personal integrity

Is valued by an objective assessment of how offensive the crime was:The humiliating nature of the incident;The intention of evoking serious fear;Directed towards a person with particular difficulties in protecting his/her personal integrity;Abuse of dependence of trust;If the act was intended to cause public intention.Often greatly exceeds other items that are compensated.

Violation of personal integrity –what amounts are awarded to crime victims?

Beating, one hit in the face, around 5 000 SEK.Threat with a weapon, around 10 000 SEK.Serious assault with a homophobic motive –40 000 SEK.

The knowledge on hate crime victimes

Distrust against the legal authorities.Afraid of not being taken seriously (lack of understanding amongst the professionals). Afraid of secondary victimization. Normalization. “There is no point to report to the police”.

PANEL DISCUSSION

28 March Panel Discussion and Conclusion
 Place: Civil Rights Defenders Office, Sergels torg 12
 Panelists:Representatives from civil society organisations discuss challenges in the work
 against hate crimes in Sweden.

Katri Linna – senior legal advisor at CRD, previous DO. Works here with minority rights, focused on sami rights and EU migrants and roma people,

Fredrik Linda – e Romani Glinda,

Johanna Westeson – Amnesty International, Legal advisor on discrimination

Kajsa Klein – Näthatsgranskaren, Researcher and creator of public something

Siri Hedmalm – moderator, junior legal advisor at CRD,

Daniel Åman – Gothenburg rescue mission Outreach work with vulnerable eu citizens in Gothenburg

Kajsa Klein: Sees hate speech online as a major threat to democracy. Started a few years ago with the thought something has to be done. Proven quite successful, has seen a big increase in the numbers of conviction. The police say it’s a priority, the government as well – but the problem is what are they actually doing? If they employed people like the ones at näthatsgranskaren, they could do so much more. Their work with the police: varies a lot, there are individual officers who are happy with them. Try to reach out to official higher up in the hierarchy. Hate crime is a serious issue which has to be dealt with.  Kajsa meets disbelief from the general public and politicians when they talk about their work – they can’t believe there’s not a single police officer in Sweden who works with these questions. Also, she meets people who are afraid – for example politicians who don’t use social media regularly because their afraid, and journalists as well.

Johanna Westeson: Legal advisor on discrimination, LGBTI  rights, Sami rights, ethnic discrimination and Roma rights. Mainly, a programme of vulnerable eu-citizens. Majority from Romania, many from Bulgaria and a majority are Roma. She published a report last year, result of a long and thorough investigation with interviews. The report looks specifically about Sweden’s responsibility, under human rights law. Sweden has the responsibility to uphold the rights of the people here. Did not specifically discuss hate crime, but heard a lot about it in the interviews while working on the report. Amnesty’s social media accounts have never been as swamped with hate comments as when they published this report. The report is available online.

Fred Taikonen: Grass root organisation, – NGO, working closely with the Swedish government and other authorities. He has been working for 20 years now against hate crimes. He started working with the ombudsman against ethnic discrimination. They could see that the harassments against Roma increased. Katri saw that it’s too cheap – the damages were too law. Statement from Katri: it should be very expensive to discriminate – all the damages became very high, which helped. Discrimination decreased after this.

Made a complaint about an article in Illustrated Science to the chancellor of justice – only said it was badly written but it didn’t discriminate against Roma. à can find an article in Swedish in E Romanic Glinda. He has also worked against ethnic profiling. The church enemy 2: they didn’t allow baptising and burying the Roma, at that time the church had a lot of power in Sweden.

Katri Linna: has worked especially on ethnic issues against racism. Diskrimineringsombudsman of ethnic discrimination for 8 years, also in minority rights. Came to CRD mostly all kinds of ethnic questions – Roma, EU-migrants, Sami, ethnic profiling. Also, extremist organisation and the Nordic Resistance Movement. Every time Sweden is criticized, they defend it with saying we have such effective legislation on hate speech – which isn’t correct with a lot of cases which go unreported.

Q & A

Q: What do you see needs to be done in combatting hate crime?

Katri Linna: “Some strategy: it’s not very strong – a lot about getting information and similarly. The problem is that there’s no accountability asked for, or work within the authorities only what they can do externally. But the problem is the authorities themselves. For example the Roma register: no one was held accountable at all. The government speaks nicely but they don’t really act on it. “

Johanna Westeson: “It’s easy to deny ethnic discrimination where we don’t have data, and it’s much harder to design measures to combat, but it’s a big fear of ethnic discrimination. Can see efforts within the police to improve their work.”

Kajsa Klein: “Terrorism in Sweden has long been linked to muslims – but people are naïve and don’t see white supremacy attacks as terrorism. Also they don’t har koll på social medias. The police needs to include what’s going on in social media and it’s something they should prioritise.”

Johanna Westeson: “Clear that minor crimes are not getting prioritised, and leaving left aside. The crimes that are less under the radar hate crimes (compared to murders) more day to day basis, they’re not getting attention from the police because they say they don’t have time.”

Fred Taikonen: “The police made a handbook, but they had only pictures of Roma in it. The police agreed they had to change it, so they changed all the pictures to look like drawings. But it was still possible to see it was all Roma. They also put a note on a wall saying “come dance with the gypsies” and a picture of a Finnish Roma. This was in 2001. The chancellor said back then that they can’t do anything about the invitation, because of how it was printed. “

Sharing good practices

Katri Linna: “What’s good in Sweden is that the rule of law is in place. Generally when I come back tos weden from abroad, everyone is really nice. Police officers on the streets are nice and helpful. Swede’s also has the highest trust for the police. In the suburbs are overpoliced, but underprotected (which is what Victor Olisa has said, an expert on ethnic profiling).”

Kajsa Klein: “A lot of schools in Sweden put a lot of effort in teaching values and childern’s right, which is important and an example of a good practice. The situation for children generally is better in Sweden than many other countries.”

Johanna Westeson: “The police are one actor, but even if they do their job – what happens with the prosecutors and in the court? Besides from the police there are other parts of the judicial – who needs to know about these questions.”

Fred Taikonen: “Have had lectures with the police academy, which is a good thing. Sweden needs an organisation free from authority who have the right to independently bring cases to court, like Näthatsgranskaren.”

Katri Lenna: “Not a lot of corruption, so the rule of law and the courts work. Police’s project about profiling. Cooperation between migration authority and police, it wasn’t known to the public but suddenly everyone was controlled on the subway. The police denied this ethnic profiling, but they were looking for foreigners and so stopped people they thought looked foreign. Fred was stopped 3 times during this. this was a scandal and very criticized. It also didn’t end in a success.”

Q: How do you evaluate the agenda of political parties, government and public media, is there a problem of hate crime? Is there statistics of hate crime?

Johanna Westeson: “In parliament we have some who definitely adds to hate speech, from the right extremist party. Has been in a lot of meetings with the police, and they’ve had good meetings where the police are listening and they leave with a good feeling, but afterwards the police takes it back and doesn’t follow up. This is a problem in Sweden. There are good political wills, but it’s sometimes hard to put the nice words into practice – it requires tough decisions.”

Kajsa Klein: “Media –  a bit of normalisation in accounts of populism and nationalism. Thinks the situation is deteriorating in media.”

Katri Lenna: “There’s a ongoing discourse both in media and political. It’s rare that politicians say something really bad, but it’s not really an issue.”

THE STUDY VISIT TO STOCKHOLM – CONCLUSION

The 5 day Study trip of the 10 Bulgarian participants (for good practices exhange and  trans-border capacity building in tackling hate crimes finished with conclusion of the study visit and reflections about the participants’ experience of the study visit in relation to their expectations.

The Bulgarian participants highlited  that they  had the chance to learn about how the  institutions in Sweden work individually and in coordination to combat hate crime, their implemented measures and their strategies for future action.

[1] https://www.government.se/information-material/2017/02/a-comprehensive-approach-to-combat-racism-and-hate-crime/

[2] https://www.government.se/information-material/2016/11/a-strategy-for-roma-inclusion/

[3] https://www.government.se/4a0326/contentassets/b9aa1c9ecc4d4cc6899409d75bcb1a70/equal-rights-and-opportunities-for-lgbt-persons-in-sweden.pdf

[4] https://www.levandehistoria.se/english