Criticism of the Prison and Probation Service, Ystad prison, for poor management after it took the position an inmate was an unsuitable representative of a fellow inmate

An inmate who had been authorised to act on behalf of a fellow inmate in a review procedure requested to receive certain documents in the case. The prison decided that the inmate was not a suitable representative but did not consider there were grounds to issue a formal decision to that effect. The inmate appealed the decision.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman finds that the inmate was an independent party in the matter of whether or not she should be allowed to be a representative, and that, according to legislation and case law, she has the right to appeal such a decision. The prison is criticised for not taking a position on the matter as soon as possible and notifying the inmate of the decision. Furthermore, the Parliamentary Ombudsman considers that the prison should have determined whether the inmate’s appeal had been lodged on time and, if that was the case, promptly referred it to the administrative court with the other documents in the case. The Parliamentary Ombudsman is also of the view that the prison should have informed the inmate of their right to have the issue of disclosure examined in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of the Press Act on the disclosure of public documents.