2025-12-032025/26:JuU8 · p.4JuUJustice
Evaluation
Evaluation of the tightened conditional-release rules
What's at stake: If the reform's effects are not systematically evaluated, there is a risk that problems, such as recidivism not decreasing, go undetected or unaddressed; the issue concerns convicted individuals who risk losing the possibility of conditional release, as well as crime victims and public safety.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether the government should be required to evaluate the overall effects of the tightened conditional-release rules five years after they take effect, or whether no such mandated evaluation should be required.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee rejects the motions calling for a mandated evaluation five years after implementation, and considers that such a separate, statutory evaluation of the tightened conditional-release rules is not necessary.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 4 (V)
The reservation holds that the proposal must not result in convicts having no possibility of conditional release at all, since both they and society would then lose the necessary supervision and reintegration during the probationary period; since consultation responses show it is disputed whether the reform actually increases societal protection, the overall effect should be evaluated five years after implementation, with the rules reviewed again if recidivism has not decreased.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 4 by V.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | No 0/19/0/3 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| S | No | Yes 91/0/0/15 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| MP | No | Abstain 0/0/15/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| C | No | Yes 21/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| L | No | Yes 14/0/0/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| KD | No | Yes 16/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| M | Yes | Yes 59/0/0/9 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| SD | Yes | Yes 63/0/0/9 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | explicit |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2025/26:3831 by Lotta Johnsson Fornarve et al. (V) point of order 1 and 2025/26:3841 by Ulrika Westerlund et al. (MP) point of order 3.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2025/26:3831 av Lotta Johnsson Fornarve m.fl. (V) yrkande 1 och 2025/26:3841 av Ulrika Westerlund m.fl. (MP) yrkande 3.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag approved the government's proposal to tighten rules for conditional release. The proposals address, among other things: the proportion of the sentence that must be served before conditional release can occur is raised from two-thirds to three-quarters, and this increase is implemented gradually starting with the longest prison sentences the threshold for postponing conditional release if the convicted person misbehaves during imprisonment is lowered it should be possible to postpone conditional release if there is a risk that the convicted person will reoffend in serious crime general minimum imprisonment, the shortest prison sentence, should be raised to one month, and all prison sentences should be covered by the conditional release system the probation period after conditional release should be at least two years, instead of today's one year, and the conditionally released person should as a general rule be subject to supervision the entire conditionally granted freedom should be forfeited upon reoffense during the probation period, and no new conditional release should be given from the forfeited portion. One purpose of the government's proposal is to shift focus from the offender to the crime victim and public safety. The legislative changes come into force on 1 January 2026, except for certain legislative changes regarding the increase in the proportion of the sentence that must be served before conditional release can occur. Those legislative changes come into force on a date determined by the government.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants the government to take measures to improve the integration of previously convicted persons into society. (V) — Reservation 4
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan requires that punishment and other sanctions be designed so that they actually lead to lower crime and do not worsen problems, and that work against crime be based on research.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that punishment and other sanctions be designed so that they actually lead to lower crime and do not worsen problems, and that work against crime be based on research. A prescribed evaluation five years after entry into force, with review if reoffending has not decreased, is precisely such a test of whether the reform works. The counter-proposal's requirement thus aligns with the plan's requirements for proposals that prove effective.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att straff och andra påföljder utformas så att de faktiskt leder till lägre brottslighet och inte förvärrar problem, och att arbetet mot brott utgår från forskningen. En föreskriven utvärdering fem år efter ikraftträdandet, med översyn om återfallen inte minskat, är just en sådan prövning av om reformen fungerar. Motförslagets krav ligger därför i linje med planens krav på förslag som visar sig effektiva.
- sanctions should reduce crimedecisive»Straff och andra påföljder för brott behöver vara noggrant utformade för att faktiskt leda till lägre brottslighet och inte förvärra problem.« (party programme ↗)“Punishment and other sanctions for crime need to be carefully designed to actually lead to lower crime and not worsen problems.”
- crime policy based on research»Vi vill se ett genomgripande arbete mot våldsbrottslighet, som utgår från forskningen.« (party programme ↗)“We want to see comprehensive work against violent crime, based on research.”
- proposals that prove effective»En framgångsrik rörelse för ett bättre samhälle behöver bygga på stabil forskning och förslag som visar sig effektiva och rättvisa den dag de genomförs.« (party programme ↗)“A successful movement for a better society needs to be built on solid research and proposals that prove effective and just when they are implemented.”
The plan requires criminal policy based on evidence, efficiency and rule of law, and that crime is fought in an evidence-based manner where principles of the rule of law are maintained.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires criminal policy based on evidence, efficiency and rule of law, and that crime is fought in an evidence-based manner where principles of the rule of law are maintained. A prescribed evaluation five years after entry into force, with review if recidivism has not decreased, is that evidence requirement put into practice. The plan furthermore wants to see equipped criminal care and a focus on reintegration into society. The counter-proposal is supported.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver en kriminalpolitik byggd på evidens, effektivitet och rättssäkerhet, och att brottslighet bekämpas på ett evidensbaserat vis där rättsstatens principer upprätthålls. En föreskriven utvärdering fem år efter ikraftträdandet, med översyn om återfallen inte minskat, är just det evidenskravet omsatt i praktiken. Planen vill dessutom se en rustad kriminalvård och fokus på återgång i samhället. Motförslaget stöds.
- evidence-based criminal policydecisive»Kriminalpolitik byggd på evidens, effektivitet och rättssäkerhet.« (party programme ↗)“Criminal policy based on evidence, efficiency and rule of law.”
- rule of law principles»Rättsstatens principer ska upprätthållas« (party programme ↗)“Principles of the rule of law shall be maintained”
- reintegration into society»Fokus på rehabilitering och återgång i samhället.« (party programme ↗)“Focus on rehabilitation and reintegration into society.”
- equipped criminal care»Rustad kriminalvård i offentlig regi.« (party programme ↗)“Equipped criminal care in public administration.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan states that conditional release should be the main rule and that release programmes should promote reintegration, and that the correctional system should have good conditions to work with rehabilitation to prevent recidivism.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan states that conditional release should be the main rule and that release programmes should promote reintegration, and that the correctional system should have good conditions to work with rehabilitation to prevent recidivism. The counter-proposal's requirement for an evaluation after five years and review if recidivism does not decrease is in line with the knowledge-based stance. The plan does not express itself on evaluation methods, so the conclusion is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att villkorlig frigivning ska vara huvudregel och att utslussningsåtgärder ska främja återanpassning, samt att kriminalvården ska ha goda förutsättningar att arbeta med rehabilitering för att förebygga återfall. Motförslagets krav på en utvärdering efter fem år och översyn om återfallen inte minskat ligger i linje med den kunskapsbaserade hållningen. Planen uttalar sig inte om utvärderingsformer, varför slutsatsen är härledd.
- conditional release as main ruledecisive»frigivning ska vara huvudregel och utslussningsåtgärder ska främja återanpassning i« (party programme ↗)“release should be the main rule and release programmes should promote reintegration in”
- rehabilitative corrections»Kriminalvården ska ha goda förutsättningar att arbeta« (party programme ↗)“The correctional system should have good conditions to work”
- careful examination of legislation»prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“be carefully examined on the basis of legal security and fundamental freedoms and rights.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan states that criminal policy shall both deter and encourage the convicted to a new life situation without crime, and it values results over political point-scoring.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan states that criminal policy shall both deter and encourage the convicted to a new life situation without crime, and it values results over political point-scoring. A prescribed evaluation five years after implementation precisely tests whether the reform delivers the results it promises, and openness is according to the plan a democratic prerequisite. The plan does not comment on evaluation requirements, however, so support is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen anger att kriminalpolitiken både ska avskräcka och stimulera den dömde till en ny livssituation utan brottslighet, och den värderar resultat framför politiskt spel. En föreskriven utvärdering fem år efter ikraftträdandet prövar just om reformen ger de resultat den utlovar, och öppenhet är enligt planen en demokratisk grundförutsättning. Planen uttalar sig dock inte om utvärderingskrav, varför stödet är härlett.
- both deterrence and reintegrationdecisive»Kriminalpolitiken ska därför både förebygga och avskräcka från brott, stödja brottsdrabbade och stimulera dem som har begått olagliga handlingar till en ny livssituation utan brottslighet.« (party programme ↗)“Criminal policy shall therefore both prevent and deter crime, support crime victims and encourage those who have committed illegal acts to a new life situation without crime.”
- results over political point-scoring»Vi värderar samarbete, ansvarstagande och resultat framför politiskt spel.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We value cooperation, responsibility and results over political point-scoring.”
- openness and monitoring»Öppenhet och transparens är grundförutsättningar för frihet, demokrati och för att förhindra korruption och övergrepp.« (party programme ↗)“Openness and transparency are basic prerequisites for freedom, democracy and for preventing corruption and abuse.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan combines stricter crime fighting with the requirement that the criminal justice system should give the individual conditions to break a criminal lifestyle, and it wants imposed legislation to be evaluated afterwards.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan combines stricter crime fighting with the requirement that the criminal justice system should give the individual conditions to break a criminal lifestyle, and it wants imposed legislation to be evaluated afterwards. A prescribed follow-up of whether the stricter release rules actually reduce recidivism is in line with that, even though the plan simultaneously wants to abolish the nearly automatic release. The foundation is weak and the conclusion derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen förenar hårdare brottsbekämpning med kravet att kriminalvården ska ge individen förutsättningar att bryta en kriminell livsstil, och den vill att ingripande lagstiftning utvärderas i efterhand. En föreskriven uppföljning av om de skärpta frigivningsreglerna faktiskt minskar återfallen ligger i linje med det, även om planen samtidigt vill slopa den närmast automatiska frigivningen. Underlaget är svagt och slutsatsen härledd.
- criminal justice system that breaks criminal trajectorydecisive»En socialliberal rättspolitik förenar brottsbekämpning med ett brett förebyggande arbete samt med en kriminalvård som ger individen förutsättningar att bryta med en kriminell livsstil.« (party programme ↗)“A socially liberal criminal policy combines crime fighting with broad preventive work and with a criminal justice system that gives the individual the conditions to break with a criminal lifestyle.”
- recurring evaluation of laws»Redan införda lagar med stark påverkan på den personliga integriteten ska regelbundet utvärderas.« (party programme ↗)“Already introduced laws with strong impact on personal integrity shall be regularly evaluated.”
- rehabilitation as a goal»Målet med tiden i fängelse är att den intagne efter avtjänat straff ska ha bättre förutsättningar att klara ett liv i frihet.« (party programme ↗)“The goal with time in prison is that the inmate after serving their sentence shall have better conditions to manage a life in freedom.”
- abolished automatic release»slopa den närmast automatiska frigivningen från fängelsestraff« (2022 manifesto ↗)“abolish the nearly automatic release from imprisonment”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan states that a person convicted of a crime shall be re-adapted and that effective correction must combine general prevention with individual prevention – the counter-proposal's concern that conditional release in practice disappears concerns just this.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan states that a person convicted of a crime shall be re-adapted and that effective correction must combine general prevention with individual prevention – the counter-proposal's concern that conditional release in practice disappears concerns just this. The plan also makes evaluation and follow-up an important political task. Evaluating the reform's overall effect after five years is therefore in line with the plan, even though it does not comment on evaluation of criminal law reforms.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att den som är dömd för brott ska återanpassas och att ett effektivt tillrättaförande måste förena allmänprevention med individualprevention — motförslagets oro för att villkorlig frigivning i praktiken försvinner rör just detta. Planen gör dessutom utvärdering och uppföljning till en viktig politisk uppgift. Att utvärdera reformens samlade effekt efter fem år ligger därför i linje med planen, även om den inte uttalar sig om utvärdering av straffreformer.
- re-adaptation of convicted offendersdecisive»Den som är dömd för brott ska återanpassas så att« (party programme ↗)“A person convicted of a crime shall be re-adapted so that”
- both general and individual prevention»Ett effektivt tillrättaförande av brottsförövare bör dessutom ha inslag av« (party programme ↗)“Effective correction of criminal offenders should also have elements of”
- evaluation as political task»kostnadsuppföljning och kvalitetskontroll är därför viktiga politiska uppgifter« (party programme ↗)“cost tracking and quality control are therefore important political tasks”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan instead wants to restrict possibilities for parole and conditional release and introduce a preventive detention sentence so that dangerous criminals can be held in custody as long as they are dangerous.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan instead wants to restrict possibilities for parole and conditional release and introduce a preventive detention sentence so that dangerous criminals can be held in custody as long as they are dangerous. The counter-proposal's demand that the possibility of release must remain and that the rules shall be reviewed if recidivism does not decrease contradicts that line. The party programme's general willingness to evaluate reforms weighs less than the election manifesto's stated sentence enhancements.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill tvärtom begränsa möjligheterna till permission och villkorlig frigivning och införa ett förvaringsstraff så att samhällsfarliga brottslingar kan hållas frihetsberövade så länge de är farliga. Motförslagets krav att frigivningsmöjligheten måste finnas kvar och att reglerna ska ses över om återfallen inte minskar går emot den linjen. Partiprogrammets allmänna beredskap att utvärdera reformer väger lättare än valmanifestets uttalade straffskärpningar.
- detention while dangerousdecisive»Införa en ny typ av förvaringsstraff så att serievåldtäktsmän och andra samhällsfarliga brottslingar kan sitta frihetsberövade så länge de är farliga för allmänheten« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Introduce a new type of preventive detention sentence so that serial rapists and other dangerous criminals can be held in custody as long as they are dangerous to the public”
- restricted conditional release»Begränsa möjligheterna till permission och villkorlig frigivning för gängkriminella« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Restrict possibilities for parole and conditional release for gang criminals”
- no sentence reductions»Ta bort alla straffrabatter för den som fyllt 18 år och slopa dagens mängdrabatter« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Remove all sentence reductions for those who have reached 18 and abolish today's quantity reductions”
- evaluation of reforms»beredskap för att utvärdera, ompröva, förändra och förbättra« (party programme ↗)“willingness to evaluate, reconsider, change and improve”
The plan requires that the entire sentence should be served before conditions can be set for release.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that the entire sentence should be served before conditions can be set for release. The counter-proposal's core requirement is that the consequence must not be that sentenced persons completely lack the possibility of conditional release and that the rules should be reviewed if recidivism does not decrease, which directly contradicts that commitment. The plan's line is instead significantly increased sentences and incapacitation.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att hela strafftiden ska tjänas av innan villkor kan ställas för frigivning. Motförslagets bärande krav är att konsekvensen inte får bli att dömda helt saknar möjlighet till villkorlig frigivning och att reglerna ska ses över om återfallen inte minskar, vilket direkt motsäger det åtagandet. Planens linje är i stället kraftigt höjda straff och inkapacitering.
- entire sentence should be serveddecisive»hela strafftiden ska tjänas av innan villkor kan ställas för frigivning för den som döms till fängelse« (2022 manifesto ↗)“the entire sentence should be served before conditions can be set for release for someone sentenced to imprisonment”
- zero tolerance and incapacitation»Sveriges kriminalpolitik behöver helt läggas om för att bygga på nolltolerans och inkapacitering.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Sweden's criminal policy needs to be completely reformed to be based on zero tolerance and incapacitation.”
- significantly increased sentences»Kraftigt höja straffen samt avskaffa mängdrabatten vid allvarliga brott mot person« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Significantly increase sentences and abolish the quantity reduction for serious crimes against person”
- proportional sentences»Införa straff som är proportionerliga« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Implement sentences that are proportional”
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2025/26:JuU8)
- Committee report full text (HD01JuU8)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2025/26:3831 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:34 Skärpta regler för villkorlig frigivning av Lotta Johnsson Fornarve m.fl. (V)
- Motion 2025/26:3835 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:34 Skärpta regler för villkorlig frigivning av Teresa Carvalho m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2025/26:3841 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:34 Skärpta regler för villkorlig frigivning av Ulrika Westerlund m.fl. (MP)
- Proposition 2025/26:34 — Skärpta regler för villkorlig frigivning
Source: The Swedish Parliament