2026-06-152025/26:JuU40 · p.4JuUJustice
Exception for compelling public interest
Exception for overriding public interest in the new offence of abusing a public position
What's at stake: Officials who, in an emergency, are forced to breach procurement rules to protect an urgent public interest such as healthcare could otherwise risk being convicted of abusing a public position even though their intention was to safeguard the service. The question matters for how confidently officials can act in crisis and emergency situations.
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 new offence of abusing a public position should include an explicit exception for situations involving an overriding public interest, or whether the bill's current wording without such an exception is sufficient.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee rejects the motion for a special exception and does not consider the law needs an explicit safety valve for overriding public interest, since the offence already requires an intentional breach of the law aimed at securing an undue benefit or disadvantaging someone else, which the committee holds excludes genuine misjudgements; the committee holds that the importance of strengthening trust in public administration outweighs the risks that have been raised.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 3 (S, V)
The reserving members consider that the law needs a clear exception for situations where officials are forced to breach procurement rules due to an overriding public interest, for example an emergency within healthcare, pointing to a case involving the direct procurement of ambulance helicopters as an illustration; they want the government to clarify the legislation so that such situations do not risk falling within criminal liability.
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 3 by S, 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 0/21/0/0 | follows the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| S | Yes | No 0/105/0/1 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| MP | No | Yes 18/0/0/0 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| C | No | Yes 24/0/0/0 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| L | No | Yes 16/0/0/0 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| KD | No | Yes 19/0/0/0 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| M | Yes | Yes 66/0/0/0 | follows the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| SD | No | Yes 70/0/0/0 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
Committee proposal
Parliament rejects the motion 2025/26:4099 by Teresa Carvalho et al. (S) demand 2.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motion 2025/26:4099 av Teresa Carvalho m.fl. (S) yrkande 2.
Riksdag decision: Parliament voted yes on the government's proposal which introduces a new crime in the Penal Code called misuse of public position and sharpens the minimum penalty for serious dereliction of duty to imprisonment for one year and six months. Through the new crime it is punishable to intentionally contrary to law or other regulation take or fail to take an action in order to gain an improper advantage or so that someone else obtains such an advantage, or to improperly harm someone else. The new crime applies to anyone who holds a public office, exercises a public assignment or other public activity. If the crime is serious it shall be convicted of serious misuse of public position. The penalty for misuse of public position is proposed to be fines or imprisonment for no more than two years. For serious misuse of public position imprisonment for no less than one year and six months and no more than six years. The legislative amendments enter into force on 1 August 2026.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants the government's proposal for new crimes involving abuse of public office to be rejected. (S, V) — Reservation 3
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 is built on confidence in the knowledge and commitment of those who perform work in welfare and opposes governance systems that turn the profession into administrators.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan is built on confidence in the knowledge and commitment of those who perform work in welfare and opposes governance systems that turn the profession into administrators. That a public official who in an emergency situation in healthcare is forced to breach procurement rules risks criminal liability goes against that confidence and against the principle that care is given according to people's needs. A clear exception for compelling public interest thus aligns with the plan, which however does not directly address the question.
Original (Swedish)
Planen bygger på tillit till kunskapen och engagemanget hos dem som utför arbetet i välfärden och vänder sig mot styrsystem som gör professionen till administratörer. Att en tjänsteman som i en nödsituation inom sjukvården tvingas frångå upphandlingsregler riskerar straffansvar går emot den tilliten och emot principen att vården ges efter människors behov. Ett tydligt undantag för tvingande samhällsintresse ligger därför i linje med planen, som dock inte behandlar frågan direkt.
- confidence in the professiondecisive»Tillit till kunskapen och engagemanget hos dem som gör« (party programme ↗)“Confidence in the knowledge and commitment of those who do”
- care according to needs»Vård måste ges efter människors behov och inte efter kapaciteten i felaktigt konstruerade system.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Care must be given according to people's needs and not according to the capacity in incorrectly constructed systems.”
- activity's needs before bureaucracy»Det är resurser som främst behövs, inte formulär för kvalitetssäkring, nya bokningssystem för sjukhussängar eller ännu en managementkonsult som inte kan något om verksamheten.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It is resources that are mainly needed, not forms for quality assurance, new booking systems for hospital beds or yet another management consultant who knows nothing about the activity.”
The plan's decisive commitment here is preventing corruption and undue influence and stopping leakage of tax revenue.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan's decisive commitment here is preventing corruption and undue influence and stopping leakage of tax revenue. An explicit exception for compelling public interest opens a valve in the criminal responsibility the plan wants to see, without the plan requesting any such thing. The plan's requirement for legal security speaks for clear legislation but not for exempting entire situation types.
Original (Swedish)
Planens avgörande åtagande här är förhindrande av korruption och otillbörlig påverkan och att läckage av skattemedel stoppas. Ett uttryckligt undantag för tvingande samhällsintresse öppnar en ventil i det straffansvar planen vill se, utan att planen efterfrågar någon sådan. Planens krav på rättssäkerhet talar för tydlig lagstiftning men inte för att undanta hela situationstyper.
- prevented corruptiondecisive»Förhindrande av korruption och otillbörlig påverkan.« (party programme ↗)“Prevention of corruption and undue influence.”
- stopped leakage of tax revenue»Avskaffande av system som leder till bristande kontroll, läckage av skattemedel,« (party programme ↗)“Abolition of systems leading to lack of control, leakage of tax revenue,”
- legally secure criminal policy»Kriminalpolitik byggd på evidens, effektivitet och rättssäkerhet.« (party programme ↗)“Criminal policy built on evidence, effectiveness and legal security.”
- preparedness in crisis»Svensk motståndskraft liksom medborgarnas säkerhet och trygghet sätts före« (party programme ↗)“Swedish resilience as well as citizens' security and safety come before”
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 counter-proposal wants an explicit exemption when officials are forced to depart from procurement rules in a compelling public interest, for example an emergency situation in healthcare.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The counter-proposal wants an explicit exemption when officials are forced to depart from procurement rules in a compelling public interest, for example an emergency situation in healthcare. The plan requires that new legislation be carefully examined on the basis of legal certainty and fundamental rights and that crime-fighting does not take place at the expense of the principles of the constitutional state. That care shall be given according to greatest need also speaks against emergency situations creating criminal liability.
Original (Swedish)
Motförslaget vill ha ett uttryckligt undantag när tjänstemän tvingas frångå upphandlingsregler vid ett tvingande samhällsintresse, till exempel en nödsituation i sjukvården. Planen kräver att ny lagstiftning prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande rättigheter och att brottsbekämpning inte sker på bekostnad av rättsstatens principer. Att vård ska ges efter störst behov talar också för att nödsituationer inte ska riskera straffansvar.
- rights-secure and proportional lawdecisive»prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“be carefully examined on the basis of legal certainty and fundamental freedoms and rights.”
- constitutional state principles weigh heavily»självständigt och rättssäkert. Brottsbekämpning ska inte ske på bekostnad av« (party programme ↗)“independent and rights-secure. Crime-fighting shall not take place at the expense of”
- healthcare according to greatest need»Människor med störst behov ska prioriteras. Vården ska möta hela« (party programme ↗)“People with greatest need shall be prioritised. Healthcare shall meet the whole”
- secure conditions for employees»Miljöpartiet vill stärka arbetstagarnas rättigheter och ställa tydligare krav på arbetsgivare« (party programme ↗)“The Greens want to strengthen workers' rights and make clearer demands on employers”
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 party programme establishes that the state shall do what it is for, as efficiently and securely as possible, and that the state is for people.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme establishes that the state shall do what it is for, as efficiently and securely as possible, and that the state is for people. A clear escape valve for officials who in an emergency must deviate from procurement rules follows from that and from the requirement for clear, enforceable legislation. The plan's strong anti-corruption line at the same time argues against loosening responsibility, which makes the assessment uncertain.
Original (Swedish)
Partiprogrammet slår fast att staten ska göra det den är till för, så effektivt och rättssäkert som möjligt, och att staten är till för människan. En tydlig ventil för tjänstemän som i en nödsituation måste frångå upphandlingsregler följer av det och av kravet på tydlig, utkrävbar lagstiftning. Planens starka antikorruptionslinje talar samtidigt emot att luckra upp ansvaret, vilket gör bedömningen osäker.
- efficient and legally secure statedecisive»Centerpartiets uppgift är att se till att staten gör det den är till för, så effektivt och rättssäkert som möjligt« (party programme ↗)“The Center Party's task is to see that the state does what it is for, as efficiently and securely as possible”
- the state is for people»Staten är till för människan, inte tvärtom.« (party programme ↗)“The state is for people, not the other way around.”
- clear legislation»Vi vill se en rättighetslagstiftning, ett tydligt samhällskontrakt med utkrävbara rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“We want to see rights-based legislation, a clear social contract with enforceable rights.”
- tightened rules against corruption»Vi vill inrätta en antikorruptionsmyndighet, skärpa regler mot korruption och införa ett lobbyregister.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We want to establish an anti-corruption authority, tighten rules against corruption and introduce a lobbying register.”
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 wants rules that make it easy to do right and requires that legal certainty and protection of civil liberties and rights be strengthened.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants rules that make it easy to do right and requires that legal certainty and protection of civil liberties and rights be strengthened. It also wants to protect public employees against exposure in service. A clear exemption for compelling public interests, such as an emergency situation in healthcare, aligns with this without disrupting the plan's requirement for orderly procurement.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill ha spelregler som gör det lätt att göra rätt och kräver att rättssäkerheten och skyddet för de medborgerliga fri- och rättigheterna förstärks. Den vill dessutom skydda offentliganställda mot utsatthet i tjänsten. Ett tydligt undantag för tvingande samhällsintressen, som en nödsituation i sjukvården, ligger i linje med detta utan att rubba planens krav på ordnad upphandling.
- strengthened legal certaintydecisive»Rättssäkerheten och skyddet för de medborgerliga fri- och rättigheterna behöver förstärkas.« (party programme ↗)“Legal certainty and protection of civil liberties and rights need to be strengthened.”
- easy to do right»Vi vill ha spelregler som gör det lätt att göra rätt och säkerställer konkurrens på rättvisa villkor även i digitaliseringens och delningsekonomins tid.« (party programme ↗)“We want rules that make it easy to do the right thing and ensure competition on fair terms even in the age of digitalization and the sharing economy.”
- protection for public employees»Socialsekreterare och andra offentliganställda ska skyddas mot förföljelse och utsatthet genom att ett nytt brott – tjänstemannaförföljelse – införs.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Social workers and other public employees shall be protected against persecution and exposure through the introduction of a new crime – official persecution.”
- orderly procurement»Offentlig upphandling ska ske på sätt som ger skattebetalarna låga kostnader, hög kvalitet, säkrar likabehandling och stimulerar konkurrens.« (party programme ↗)“Public procurement shall be done in ways that give taxpayers low costs, high quality, secure equal treatment, and stimulate competition.”
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 requires that criminal legal reactions are anchored in clear legislation and highlights practical wisdom as the foremost virtue in difficult choice situations.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that criminal legal reactions are anchored in clear legislation and highlights practical wisdom as the foremost virtue in difficult choice situations. When the right to life is at stake, as in an emergency situation in healthcare, the documents argue that the legislator should clarify that such actions are not subject to criminal liability. However, the documents do not address procurement rules, which makes the conclusion uncertain.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att straffrättsliga reaktioner är förankrade i en tydlig lagstiftning och lyfter praktisk klokskap som den främsta dygden i svåra valsituationer. När rätten till liv står på spel, som vid en nödsituation i sjukvården, talar dokumenten för att lagstiftaren tydliggör att sådana handlingar inte träffas av straffansvar. Dokumenten behandlar dock inte upphandlingsregler, varför slutsatsen är osäker.
- clear and humane legislationdecisive»innefatta snabba och förutsägbara reaktioner som är förankrade i en human och tydlig« (party programme ↗)“include swift and predictable reactions anchored in a humane and clear”
- the right to life»Rätten till liv är en grundläggande mänsklig rättighet. Respekten för den är en förutsättning« (party programme ↗)“The right to life is a fundamental human right. Respect for it is a prerequisite”
- practical wisdom in choice situations»Den viktigaste av de fyra kardinaldygderna är praktisk klokskap. Med den avses en kritisk« (party programme ↗)“The most important of the four cardinal virtues is practical wisdom. It refers to a critical”
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 wants to sharpen official liability so that responsibility follows all public exercise of power and to clarify how accountability can be demanded for public decisions.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants to sharpen official liability so that responsibility follows all public exercise of power and to clarify how accountability can be demanded for public decisions. A special valve for compelling social interest would conversely open an escape route in the new criminal liability. The plan says nothing about just emergencies in procurement, so certainty is low.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill skärpa tjänstemannaansvaret så att ansvar följer med all offentlig maktutövning och förtydliga hur ansvar kan utkrävas för offentliga beslut. En särskild ventil för tvingande samhällsintresse skulle tvärtom öppna en undantagsväg i det nya straffansvaret. Planen säger inget om just nödsituationer i upphandling, varför säkerheten är låg.
- skärpt tjänstemannaansvardecisive»Skärpa tjänstemannaansvaret så att du som skattebetalare vet att med all offentlig maktutövning följer ett ansvar för de beslut som fattas« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Sharpen official liability so that you as a taxpayer know that all public exercise of power is accompanied by responsibility for the decisions that are made”
- tydligt ansvarsutkrävande»Vi ser stora behov av att förstärka domstolarnas oberoende och förtydliga hur ansvar kan utkrävas för offentliga beslut.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We see major needs to strengthen court independence and clarify how accountability can be demanded for public decisions.”
- lagstyrd maktutövning»All offentlig maktutövning ska vara lagstyrd och vägledas av« (party programme ↗)“All public exercise of power shall be governed by law and guided by”
The plan requires special crisis legislation that regulates how exceptional measures can quickly be put in place by the public in crises.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires special crisis legislation that regulates how exceptional measures can quickly be put in place by the public in crises. The counter-proposal's demand for an explicit valve for situations where an official is forced to deviate from procurement rules for a compelling societal interest, such as an emergency in health care, aligns with this. The plan at the same time wants to reintroduce official responsibility, which makes the support conditional.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver en särskild krislagstiftning som reglerar hur undantagsåtgärder snabbt ska kunna sättas in av det allmänna vid kriser. Motförslagets krav på en uttrycklig ventil för situationer där en tjänsteman tvingas frångå upphandlingsreglerna vid ett tvingande samhällsintresse, som en nödsituation i sjukvården, ligger i linje med detta. Planen vill samtidigt återinföra tjänstemannaansvaret, vilket gör stödet villkorat.
- crisis legislation with exceptional measuresdecisive»Särskild lagstiftning bör tas fram för hur en krisorganisation effektivt ska kunna samordna samhällets insatser vid en kris och hur undantagsåtgärder snabbt ska kunna sättas in av det allmänna.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Special legislation should be developed for how a crisis organization can effectively coordinate society's efforts in a crisis and how exceptional measures can quickly be put in place by the public.”
- special crisis legislation»Ta fram en särskild krislagstiftning« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Develop special crisis legislation”
- strengthened crisis management capacity»Den operativa krisledningsförmågan behöver stärkas på Regeringskansliet och vid landets myndigheter, regioner och kommuner.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The operational crisis management capacity needs to be strengthened at the Government Offices and at the country's authorities, regions and municipalities.”
- official responsibility»Återinför tjänstemannaansvaret« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Reintroduce official responsibility”
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.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2025/26:JuU40)
- Committee report full text (HD01JuU40)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2025/26:4099 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:217 Ett utökat straffrättsligt tjänstemannaansvar av Teresa Carvalho m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2025/26:4107 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:217 Ett utökat straffrättsligt tjänstemannaansvar av Samuel Gonzalez Westling m.fl. (V)
- Motion 2025/26:4112 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:217 Ett utökat straffrättsligt tjänstemannaansvar av Ulrika Liljeberg m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2025/26:4116 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:217 Ett utökat straffrättsligt tjänstemannaansvar av Mats Berglund m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2025/26:4123 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:217 Ett utökat straffrättsligt tjänstemannaansvar av Daniel Riazat m.fl. (-)
- Proposition 2025/26:217 — Ett utökat straffrättsligt tjänstemannaansvar
Source: The Swedish Parliament