Successful Human Rights Implementation? Victims of Crime and the Swedish Example

ABSTRACT Consideration of victims and how best to acknowledge their rights and position in the criminal prosecution process has become an intrinsic part of the drafting and negotiation of new international criminal law instruments. In studies of states’ implementation of international victims’ rights, Sweden often places at the top of the class. This article challenges the concept of successful implementation of human rights norms by critically analysing the conformity of Swedish law with international legal obligations towards victims of crime. It further contributes to existing literature describing the factors that may facilitate or obstruct such implementation, and demonstrates that Sweden’s position as a model of successful implementation is more the result of the historical position given to victims of crime in the country than of its commitment to live up to its international obligations. The article also raises doubt as to the Swedish government’s commitment to assuring that Swedish national law upholds its present conformity with international law norms, protecting victims into the future.


Introduction
Victims of crime have attracted attention in international law making and the resulting legal instruments since at least the 1980s, and consideration of victims and how best to acknowledge their rights and position in the criminal process has since become a standard part of the drafting and negotiation of new international and regional criminal instruments. The introduction of concepts such as victims' rights at the international and regional levels implies that states have to take certain measures at the national level in order for the international norms to become an enforceable reality. National implementation of international norms regarding victims of crime has received some attention in legal scholarship. While such studies have revealed a general failure by states to comply fully with victims' rights instruments, 1 Sweden tends to fare well in international comparisons and has been highlighted as an example of best practice. 2 This ties in with a general conception of Swedish exceptionality in the area of foreign policy, explained by its history, culture, and emphasis on rationality. 3 However, scholars have argued that Swedish exceptionalism has two sides. A seeming commitment to international law in general and to human rights in particular is accompanied by domestic reluctance to fully implement human rights norms, for example in terms of individual rights and judicial review. 4 With its focus on the legal implementation of international law relating to victims of crime, this article contributes to existing literature on Swedish exceptionalism in an area so far little explored. 5 It analyses to what extent Sweden deserves its reputation in the area of human rights protection for victims of crime. It assesses whether the role of victims and their legal protection is connected to the active implementation of international obligations, or if other factors have been more important.
One such factor is the strong position, identified in international comparison, 6 that is traditionally given to victims of crime under Swedish criminal and procedural law, developed long before the advent of human rights on the international agenda. This state of affairs implies that taking an active role in the international community in the adoption of new instruments protecting victims of crime and ratifying treaties comes with low costs for Sweden, where it is considered to have little effect on Swedish sovereignty .

7
The Swedish strategy of deeming national legislation to be already in harmony with international obligations, and thus requiring no modifications, has sometimes come back to haunt it, however, with international and domestic critique eventually turning domestic political opinion towards working harder on implementation. In relation to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), 8 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 9 repeated international criticism of Sweden's level of implementation contributed to the subsequent incorporations of these instruments into Swedish law. 10 Given that international legal protection of human rights in general and protection of victims of crime in particular is under continuing development, it is necessary for states to continuously assess whether domestic rules are in accord with applicable international law rules. 11 This article therefore assesses the Swedish government's consideration of international instruments in legislative matters as well as the overall level of conformity between Swedish law concerning victims of crime and Sweden's closely related international legal obligations. 12 In so doing, the article makes a contribution to existing literature both on implementation of human rights norms and state compliance with such norms, and on the factors that may facilitate or obstruct such implementation and compliance. 13 Implementation is here understood as the process of putting legal commitments into effect, and compliance as a state of conformity between a state's behaviour and a specified legal rule. Compliance theory is a complex and contested field. 14 The modest position taken here is that the extent to which states meet their international commitments is dependent on a variety of factors within six categories: the nature of the underlying problem, the structure of the legal 'solution', the methods in which the solution is developed, the character of the norms, broader international factors, and factors specific to an individual state. 15 Examples of such factors are the rules' normative authoritywhether they are binding or notwhich may affect states' actions, and their level of claritythe broader and more goal-oriented the rules are, the lesser the inclination of states to act. Another example is the treaty bodies' or national jurisdictions' sanctions systems and available remedies. 16 Several of these factors, relevant in the Swedish case of victims of crime, are revisited in the final analysis to help explain the findings.
The article focuses on how international legal obligations and expectations are received and discussed in the Swedish legislative process, specifically within published incorporation of the CRC was necessary, see R Thorburn Stern, 'Much Ado about Nothing? The Road to the Incorporation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in Sweden' (2019) 27 The International Journal of Children's Rights 266. 11 There is a risk that states do not evolve past the 'tactical concessions phase' according to the influential model for international relations and human rights implementation developed by T Risse, S Ropp and K Sikkink (eds),  12 In line with a comprehensive understanding of the term international law, 'international legal obligations' here includes both international legal sources, such as treaties adopted under the auspices of the UN, and regional legal sources, such as directives from the European Union and recommendations and conventions from the Council of Europe. Where clarification of differences between the international and regional levels and instruments is deemed important, the distinction is made. 13  preparatory works and their expression in legislation. Other aspects of implementation and compliance, such as court practice, the work of various institutions, and the actual access to rights and services for victims, are outside its scope. The whole range of rights for victims of crime are not included, but emphasis is placed on the obligations relating to participation in criminal investigation and trial.
The article is structured in six parts. Sections 2 and 3 give an overview of the human rights instruments adopted since World War II that are relevant for victims of crime and the evaluations made of states' compliance with these instruments. Section 4 introduces the topic of implementation of international obligations into Swedish law. Section 5 analyses the extent to which Sweden lives up to the spectrum of political expectations and legal obligations to which it is subject. In the sixth and final section, conclusions are drawn and factors facilitating or obstructing implementation are discussed.

The International Legal Framework for Victims of Crime
The international legal framework protecting victims of crime is linked to the protection of human rights in general, which rose to prominence at the end of World War II. Human rights norms are relevant for victims of crime in several ways. As part of the duty to respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, states are obligated in a general sense to prevent violations from taking place and more specifically to take measures to protect and fulfil these rights, such as by criminalising serious offences and investigating and prosecuting those crimes that do occur. 17 The human rights instruments are also relevant for victims of crime in that they establish a right to a remedy and the right to a fair trial. 18 This general human right to a legal procedure has been interpreted by various bodies (both international and regional) to mean that states must ensure that a range of criminal procedural rights are afforded to victims of crime, including information, the possibility of appeal against decisions not to prosecute, and the possibility of bringing damages claims. 19 A growing number of instruments also state explicitly that victims of crime have a variety of rights, which they then specify in detail. Some of these are nonbinding, while others are binding.
The binding instruments that include rights for or account for victims of crime can be classified as general international human rights instruments, 20 regional general human rights instruments, 21  group, 22 and instruments addressing particular crimes. 23 There is also the category of binding instruments that protect victims of crime as a group, which only exist regionally. The Council of Europe Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes addresses one particular aspect of victimisation: the right to reparation from the state. 24 The European Union has adopted binding acts concerning victims of crime on a number of occasions, 25 the latest being the Crime Victim Directive, 26 which EU member states were required to implement by November 2015.
The non-binding instruments also can be divided into those that address particular crimes, 27 particular vulnerable groups, 28 or protect victims of crime as a group. The Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (Victim Declaration), 29 adopted by the United Nation's General Assembly in 1985, was the first international instrument addressing victims of crime as a group. The Declaration establishes that victims of crime and abuse of power should have access to justice and fair treatment, restitution, compensation from the state, and assistance. Also deserving mention is the UN's Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (Basic Principles). 30 Other non-binding instruments of relevance to Sweden are the Council of Europe recommendations. 31 To date, no internationally binding treaty protects the rights of victims of crime as a group. The non-binding Victim Declaration from 1985 remains the main international instrument comprehensively addressing all kinds of criminal victimisation as well as the rights of victims. This is in contrast with the situation in the EU, where the binding EU Victims' Rights Directive provides minimum rights for all victims of crime in the Union. Despite the absence of a binding, comprehensive international treaty for victims of crime, and although the international and regional legal protection differs between crimes and between victim groups, what this short overview demonstrates is that international human rights law is relevant for victims of crime and protects many rights of many categories of victims of many types of offences. 32

The Implementation of Victims' Rights in National Jurisdictions
The interests of victims of crime are thus increasingly acknowledged in international and regional instruments. The question is what actual benefits these instruments offer to victims. Their catalogues of rights differ, but certain concepts recur. These include the right to lodge a complaint and to an investigation, the right to give and receive information, the right to legal counsel or legal representation, the right to privacy and security, and the right to reparation from the perpetrator or the state. 33 As human rights tend to be, many of the concepts are vaguely worded and goal-oriented, requiring positive actions by the states; a margin of appreciation often means that not so much happens at the domestic level. States' compliance to certain victims' rights instruments, some binding and others non-binding, have been evaluated. 34 These evaluations have sought to study both formal implementation in law and implementation in practice, which victimologists emphasise as important for gaining a full picture of the realisation of victims' rights. 35 Early on, the non-binding Victim Declaration was followed by initiatives to promote compliance, such as a Handbook for states, and states were invited to answer a questionnaire on measures taken. Its results were disappointing. 36 Although no thorough global evaluation has been carried out, victimologist Marc Groenhuijsen's assessment is that states have failed to implement the Victim Declaration, based on his study of national implementation of EU and Council of Europe instruments. 37 Another study made a thorough evaluation of the In comparison with the UN and Council of Europe instruments, the Directive stands out. EU law has been found to have more effective implementation than instruments from other organisations. 40 It has a supranational character (supremacy over national laws in areas of EU competence), is binding and enforceable by the EU institutions, 41 and because many legal acts from the EU have direct effect they can even be enforced by individuals in national courts. 42 In May 2020, the European Commission finalised their evaluation of the implementation of the Victims' Rights Directive. It concluded that most EU member states had not completely transposed the Directive within the mandatory implementation period and it launched infringement procedures against each that had not. The Commission found shortcomings in implementation in key provisions of the Directive, such as the right to information, victims' access to support services, and protection in accordance with victims' individual needs. 43 Victimologists assessed that stronger state compliance would only have come if the non-binding Victim Declaration were made binding too. The World Society of Victimology drafted a crime victim convention, 44 but their work in this area has not attracted much interest from the UN to date.
State compliance with the central victims' rights instruments is still unsatisfactory, despite serious efforts by the UN and EU to promote their standards and norms. 45 The following sections focus on Sweden's response to the international legal framework and the extent to which Sweden's laws correspond with its various international obligations in this area.

The Implementation of International Obligations in Swedish Law
Sweden's apparent commitment to human rights in foreign policy has led international relations scholars to dub the state a ' … global good Samaritan' setting a 'gold standard'. 46 It is party to most international human rights instruments, and to international and European criminal law treaties including the Genocide Convention, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, 47  Torture, the ICCPR, the ECHR, and the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court. It has made no relevant reservations to any of these instruments. 48 Sweden has taken an active role in the drafting and negotiating of some of the instruments. 49 It is also bound by a number of regional instruments specifically recognising rights for victims of crime as a group, such as the Council of Europe Compensation Convention and the EU Victims' Rights Directive. In addition, the international and regional non-binding instruments addressing victims of crime in general are relevant in the Swedish context. 50 How are these political expectations and legal obligations received in Swedish law and policy? Reports from Swedish government agencies refer to international standards regarding victims and victims' rightsto such an extent that there is talk of a trend of emphasising victims' rights. 51 But is this matched by a will to change legislation to conform with international obligations, and are thorough analyses made to assess the need for such change?
Sweden is considered a dualist state. This means that implementing international law obligations in Swedish law requires domestic legislative measures. 52 The ratification of a treaty by the Swedish government often requires the approval of the Swedish Parliament (riksdagens). 53 The ratification process typically involves a government committee of inquiry looking into the level of conformity between the international treaty and existing legislation. The committee identifies any potential loopholes and deficiencies, and suggests changes necessary to remedy the lack of conformity. These are published in a report (betänkande). 54 The report is circulated for formal consultation (remiss), after which the government formulates a bill (proposition) which is then presented to the Parliament. In fact, most legislative matters in Sweden follow these steps. Proposed changes are usually decided by the Swedish Parliament at the same time the decision is taken to approve the treaty. 55 The most common way in which international treaties have been received historically is that this review results in a finding of norm harmony between the treaty and existing Swedish national law, and therefore a conclusion that no legislative adjustments are needed. Courts and authorities are then presumed to interpret national legislation in conformity with the requirements of the treaty. 56  transformation of treaties into domestic law (conversion or literal translation to Swedish of parts or all of the treaty and enactment of the resulting text as a national law) and the incorporation of a whole treaty into law by reference in law to the treaty as such. 57 The EU adopts various legal instruments, some directly applicable in member states, others not. 58 Directives require a similar process of transposition into Swedish national law as treaties.
Non-binding instruments such as the Victim Declaration, or those adopted by the Council of Europe concerning victims of crime, do not require an act of the government and Parliament such as ratification or accession, and therefore no formal inquiry is made. Because they are not law in a traditional sense, non-binding instruments generally do not lead to any published assessment whatsoever regarding conformity with current Swedish domestic law as a reaction to their adoption. The Swedish government and authorities do address them in other ways and documents, however, as will be shown below.
The following analysis encompasses Sweden's obligations to provide victims of crime information, 59 the possibility to report crime, 60 an investigation of the crime, 61 participation in criminal procedures, 62 possibility to appeal decisions not to prosecute, 63 legal representation, 64 and reparation. 65 It focuses on legislative measures, analysing to what extent reforms have been informed by international instruments concerning victims of crime, the conformity of legislation with international obligations, and the overall level of conformity between Swedish law concerning victims of crime and Sweden's closely related international legal obligations. The analysis is primarily based on preparatory works from the Swedish national legislative process. This material will not allow conclusions to be drawn as to the overall level of compliance with international norms in practice. A starting point assumed is that legislation is an important part of implementation and that the discussions in legislative matters are indicative of the Swedish government's attitude towards the overall implementation of victims' norms. Preparatory works are an important legal source under Swedish law, commonly used in the interpretation of legislation, not least by judges. The preparatory works typically describe in detail the reasons or motives behind legal reforms, along with the various factors taken into consideration before the adoption of new rules and examples to guide the interpretation of the legislation. They are therefore valuable sources of information on the considerations made before new rules are adopted by the Parliament and the factors that wereand were nottaken into consideration. 66 The preparatory works at the centre of this article's analysis are those created before or in connection with proposed new national Swedish legislation concerning procedural rights for victims of crime, and include reports by committees of inquiry as well as government bills. Victims' procedural rights found in international law guided the selection of preparatory works: 67 documents relating to each concept's manifestation in Swedish preparatory works and legislation were identified and analysed. For example, in relation to the right to information, the preparatory works to legislation relating to this right were included. In this process, both purely national initiatives for legislative changes and those called for by Sweden's international commitments were captured. Search words such as 'convention', 'declaration', and 'resolution' were used in order to identify discussions and analyses relating to international instruments and the reasoning regarding conformity.

The Recognition of International Victims' Rights in Legislative Work Concerning Victims of Crime and Assessment of Conformity
Starting in the 1970s, many national legal systems have recognised the situation of victims and their need for support and protection during the criminal procedure, in parallel with the developments on the international level (see section 2). Countries in all parts of the world have since reformed their criminal procedural law with the victim in mind. In Sweden, such reforms have included the right to state compensation, legal counsel, information, and certain protective measures. During the same period, victimology has developed into a specialist area of study. Part of this research examines the position of victims in criminal procedure in different systems, including adversarial (such as England and the United States), inquisitorial (such as Germany and France) and mixed systems (such as Sweden and Denmark). 68 Victimology has also established itself as a research field in Sweden, not least in the area of law. 69 Sweden has no particular unit within the judicial system with responsibility for crime victims' rights. Protective measures are the responsibility of the Swedish police, 70 while legal support and advice are given by publicly provided legal counsel. 71 Victims' healthcare is provided through the ordinary healthcare institutions and is not connected to the criminal procedure. General social support for crime victims is the responsibility of the municipalities, 72 but also provided by local victims' aid organisations. 73 Among other tasks, the national authority for victims of crime, the Swedish Crime Victim Authority, 74 administers state compensation to victims of crime in cases where it is not provided as, for example, damages paid by the perpetrator or as a result of private insurance coverage. 75 This system is not without its flaws. Studies on victims' needs, support, and participation in criminal proceedings has shown shortcomings, for instance with regard to victims' access to the right to information and legal counsel. 76 The position of victims of crime in Swedish criminal procedure has remained more or less the same since the adoption in 1942 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure (rättegångsbalken, or CJP). Victims' role follows the typical elements of the civil law tradition, with a possibility to participate as parties in criminal proceedings, bring their own evidence, and have their claims for damages attached to the criminal trial.

Recognition as injured party as a prerequisite for procedural rights
The term 'victims of crime' is not used in the CJP; victims are instead referred to as 'injured parties' (målsägande). 77 This definition was placed in the CJP in the 1960s. The bill proposing the change did not refer to international law, which is not surprising given that the rule has been left more or less unchanged since its adoption in the criminal law of 1864. 78 According to the definition in the legal text, the injured party is (1) the party against which the offence has been committed or (2) which has been offended or (3) suffered damage. The committee of inquiry assessing the conformity between Swedish law with the Victims' Rights Directive considered that the term 'injured party' fully covers the definition of the victim in the Directive. 79 This was later questioned by consultation bodies, but the government made the same assessment as the committee. 80 Admittedly, it is usually obvious who is the victim of a crime, but not always. The three-part definition of målsägande in the CJP has proved difficult to interpret. 81 Depending on the definitions of some crimes, some victims may fall outside the scope of the injured party definition. For instance, this could be suggested in relation to child pornography, which is criminalised as a crime against public order more than against the personal integrity of a particular child, which risks leaving child victims without status and rights as injured parties. It is crucial for victims to be covered by the definition if they are to benefit from the majority of rights in criminal proceedings, as the rights stated are only granted to the injured party. 82 As a basic prerequisite to attain a status as injured party, the offence in question must be criminalised under Swedish law. Sweden has been criticised for failure to fully implement certain international criminal instruments. One example is the Convention against Torture. 83 This convention was considered fully in harmony with existing national laws and the assessment by the Swedish government in power at the time was that no legislative changes were called for. 84 Following recurring criticism by the Committee against Torture that Sweden had not yet introduced the crime of torture into national legislation, a committee of inquiry was set up in 2014 to assess the need for a special crime of torture in Swedish law. 85 The Committee concluded that there was indeed such a need, if the law were to fully live up to the convention. It argued that by criminalising torture as a crime of its own, victims of torture are made more visible and their access to redress is strengthened, in terms of both economic compensation and rehabilitation. 86 The Swedish government has made no legislative proposal to implement this recommendation. In its latest report, the Committee against Torture confirmed that it remains concerned about this state of affairs. 87 There is thus an apparent risk that victims exposed to the crime of torture are being denied full recognition. From an international law perspective, even though the definition of 'injured party' may not be problematic, the lack of criminalisation of some internationally recognised crimes is a problem. The manner in which certain actions are criminalised may also affect the rights of victims negatively.

The rights of victims to investigation and to review decisions not to prosecute
The obligation to allow reports from victims of crime and to investigate crimes is established in, for example, the Victims' Rights Directive, the Convention against Torture, and the ECHR. Under Swedish law there is no express obligation to allow reports, but such an 82 For instance, the right to information, ss 13 b and 14 Decree on Preliminary Investigation; the right to legal counsel, Lag obligation can be derived from the Police Act, which states that the police have an obligation to investigate crimes. 88 According to one of the ombudsmen (justitieombudsmannen, JO), this means a general obligation for the police to accept reports of crime. 89 According to Ch 23 s 1 para 1 CJP, a preliminary investigation shall be initiated as soon as, after a report or otherwise, there is reason to assume that a crime under public prosecution has been committed. 90 A preliminary investigation is not required in situations where it is obvious that the crime cannot be investigated. There is an absolute duty to prosecute, meaning that the prosecutor is required to prosecute if he or she assesses that there is enough evidence establishing that a crime has been committed, and by whom. 91 This means that whoever considers themselves the victim of a crime has the possibility to report the crime. Thereafter, an investigation shall be initiated when certain criteria are met, and prosecution is obligatory if the evidence reaches a certain threshold. Swedish legislation in these parts appears to live up to international obligations, but it was already in place in the 1940s. For instance, the rule on when to open an investigation was adopted in 1942. 92 Under the Victims' Rights Directive, member states are obligated to ensure that victims have the right to a review of a decision not to prosecute. 93 In Sweden, the injured party may request a review of a decision to close an investigation or not prosecute, 94 but this possibility is not established in law, only in practice. 95 According to the committee of inquiry set up in response to the Victims' Rights Directive, this was deemed enough to satisfy the requirement under Article 11 of the Directive. 96 However, it is possible to criticise the fact that the option is not established in law. Also, the victim's right to seek review of decisions not to prosecute is under threat: a government inquiry on major criminal cases, finished in 2019, proposed limiting this right, without addressing the proposal's level of conformity with international victims' rights. 97 The proposal was justified by the need to be able to give the suspect a guarantee that the prosecutor's decisions on, for example, the maximum requested penalty would not be changed following review. According to the inquiry, the purpose of the legislative proposalto streamline the investigation in large criminal caseswould fail if such predictability did not exist. In addition, according to the inquiry, it would be contrary to the suspect's right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights to allow such appeals. Although the inquiry admits that for the injured party, this means a restriction in practice on the directly established in legislation, support for the right to appeal can be found in CJP, ch 7, s 2, och 5. In some government inquiries, the need for clearer legislation to this effect has been discussed, but they drew the conclusion that it was unnecessary to transform this custom into written law, see possibility of bringing about a change of a decision, it seems to accept this without further analysis of the injured party's right that Sweden is obligated to protect in national law under Article 11 of the Victims' Rights Directive or the potential conflict between that right and the proposal. 98

Information to victims of crime
The right to information is recognised in the Victims' Rights Directive, which requires its effective protection in every nation currently a member of the EU, but also in several non-binding human rights instruments. 99 Meanwhile, current Swedish law establishes a general obligation for authorities to provide individuals with such a level of assistance that they can effectively protect their interests, and for the police to provide information to the public whenever it is reasonable to do so. 100 For injured parties, there are more specific rules on information under Swedish law. Many of the victim-related rules within the Decree on Preliminary Investigation 101 recognise this right. The rules in the Decree establish a right to information about, for instance, where to turn to for support and protection, the right to interpretation, compensation, legal counsel, and important decisions concerning investigation and prosecution. 102 The Victims' Rights Directive prompted some amendments to the Swedish rules on access to information for crime victims, but existing rules were largely deemed to be in line with it. 103 A rule was adopted establishing a duty for the courts to inform victims, upon the victims' request, about the place and time of hearings. 104 In addition, the government made changes to the Decree on Preliminary Investigations, strengthening the general obligation to provide victims with information during preliminary investigations, for instance regarding the progress of the case. 105 The government inquiry preceding the bill concerning changes in legislation to implement the Victims' Rights Directive also suggested new rules establishing a duty to provide information to individuals who may have been victimised about the possibility to report crimes, 106 yet these were not included in the subsequent legislative proposals transposing the Directive. After having made its review of the Directive's implementation in each member state, the European Commission gave Sweden formal notice that it was not considered to have entirely implemented the Directive's right for victims to be informed about their role and the procedures available for reporting crime. 107 Sweden responded that it considered existing legislation and rules adopted in response to the Directive adequate to fulfil the Directive's requirements. 108 This seems to have satisfied the EU Commission; the infringement procedure was closed in December 2020. 109 Thus, in relation to the duty to provide information, Sweden has acknowledged EU harmonising legislation and other international norms, and such norms have prompted the adoption of new national legislation, introducing modest changes required for compliance. My independent analysis of the resulting, current Swedish legislation also supports a conclusion that such legislation is essentially in line with Sweden's obligations to provide information to victims, with the exception of rules on the duty to provide information about the procedures for making complaints.
Analysis of Sweden's experience thus demonstrates that the focus in Swedish legislation concerning victims of crime on the 'injured party' can be an obstacle in the implementation of rights for victims of crime; limiting the right to information to injured parties, as the Decree on Preliminary Investigation provides, automatically excludes victims not yet recognised as such. According to the government, victims not yet identified by law enforcement agencies are afforded a protection of their right to information through general rules on services to citizens, 110 but arguably those rules may be too vague for effective implementation to take place.

Participation in trial
In the Victims' Rights Directive, a right to be heard and to present evidence is defined at the EU level. 111 Swedish legislation can be said to be, and to have been, in accord with these rights; it includes rules allowing all injured parties to present their own evidence during a trial regarding the guilt of the accused, that is, to be examined and to enter into evidence their own testimony, to amend the indictment, and to appeal the judgment. 112 This right had been in place in Swedish law since long before the issuance of the Directive. It was introduced in 1942 as a result of a century-long domestic review of Sweden's criminal procedural law, and not as a result of Sweden's ratification of any particular international instrument or its participation as a member state in developing or implementing the new EU Directive. 113 Given this background, it is unsurprising that the government inquiry in Sweden, upon reviewing the existing provisions for this right in national law, found existing legislation to correspond with the right in question (Article 10). 114 However, this is also under threat. The same government inquiry discussing the right to appeal decisions not to prosecute (see above section 5.2) also proposed limiting the right of injured parties to subsidiary prosecution, to make adjustments to the indictment, to present their own evidence, and to make appeals. Again, no assessment was made of international or EU legal implications, for instance as to the level of conformity with the Victims' Rights Directive. 115

Representation by counsel
International and regional instruments do not provide a specific rule on a right to legal representation for victims of crime. Instead, they establish closely related rights such as a right to legal aid, a right to assistance, and a right to counsel regarding the victim's role in criminal procedures. 116 In Sweden, a right to counsel has been in place since a reform in 1988, providing victims of serious crimes with the right to cost-free representation by a lawyer. 117 The legislation providing a right to counsel has undergone several changes. To varying degrees, the inquiries preceding the proposals have considered international and regional instruments relevant for victims of crime. This ranges from a mere mentioning of the instruments in introductory parts of the documents 118 to a more thorough overview of the contents of those instruments. 119 One stated that the international victims' rights instruments would be taken into consideration, 120 but no further analysis or reference to them was made. None of these inquiries displays an analysis of the correspondence between these instruments with the proposed legislative changes.
When Sweden assessed what legislative changes, if any, were needed to implement the Victims' Rights Directive into national law with respect to this right, the committee of inquiry concluded that it considered the rules on legal counsel sufficient to ensure that the obligations under the Directive to provide legal representation or legal counsel would be fulfilled. 121 Is this a reasonable conclusion? While current legislation is vague on the duties of the required counsel, stating that the legal counsel should safeguard the interests of the injured party in the case and give support and help to the injured party, 122 preparatory works spell out more in detail what this help might entail, such as giving counsel concerning the damages, giving information about the criminal procedure, and advising on where to find healthcare and other support. Taken together, these provide a reasonable level of guidance to legal counsel. 123 One shortcoming is that the appointment as counsel only continues for the duration of the trial, leaving victims without a right to counsel for measures needed after the trial, such as enforcement of court decisions on damages. Preparatory works to the law on the injured party's legal counsel clearly state that it is not the responsibility of the counsel to assist the injured party with issues regarding the decision on damages when processed by insurance companies or the Crime Victim Authority. 124 Proposals to include such measures in the tasks covered by their appointment have been made repeatedly, but they have not led to legislation to that effect. 125 Instead, following a comprehensive reform of procedural law, which has resulted in more trials in the appeals court being based on evidence recorded during the trial in the District Court, 126 the main rule now is that legal counsel is not appointed at all for the appeals stage of proceedings. The legislative proposal of this change did not mention victims' rights in international or regional instruments, and the inquiry preceding it only made passing mention of them. 127

Reparation
The principle of reparation is a general principle of law, recognised in international instruments both as state-to-state reparations and as a human right for individuals. Sweden is under obligation to implement this right for individuals under several instruments, including the Compensation Convention, the Convention against Torture, and the ECHR. A more limited requirement is included in the Victims' Rights Directive, to allow claims to be made if there are such rules under a member state's national law. 128 Sweden does have such rules. The right to reparation from the wrongdoer is ancient in Swedish law. Medieval laws provided for a fine that simultaneously served as punishment and payment of damages. 129 Today, tort law is separated from criminal law. Procedurally it remains connected, in that victims are allowed to attach a civil claim to the criminal trial. This rule was included in the CJP at its adoption in 1942. 130 In this sense Swedish law on torts and criminal procedure lives up to international obligations, but was already in place at the time of the establishment of those obligations. International law sources are quite vague on the actual forms or contents of reparations from the offender or state. 131 There are no international legal requirements for certain types of damages or levels of monetary damages to victims of crime.
The question of reparations includes provisions concerned with victims' ability to obtain reparations in the event of the accused being indigent. Sweden is under obligation to provide such state compensation under the Compensation Convention, as well as the EU Directive relating to compensation to crime victims (Compensation Directive). 132 In Sweden, a system exists through which victims can receive compensation from the state, so-called criminal injuries compensation (brottsskadeersättning), in cases where it is not paid through, for example, damages paid by the perpetrator or as a result of private insurance coverage. 133 The law establishing this right was adopted in 1978, 134 and the government authority responsible today, the Crime Victim Authority, was established in 1994. When the law was adopted in the 1970s, no mention was made in preparatory works of international law, but when a new law on state compensation was adopted in 2014, reference was made to the Compensation Directive and to the Victims' Rights Directive. 135 None of the other instruments addressing state compensation to victims of crime were mentioned. 136

Conclusions
This article has analysed a number of concepts now firmly established as victims' rights on the international and regional levels. The way international and regional instruments were considered in the government's inquiries preceding legal reforms concerning victims of crime has been analysed, as well as the overall level of conformity between Swedish law concerning victims of crime and Sweden's closely related international legal obligations. The article has shown that in legislative matters relating to procedural rights for victims of crime, reference to international law is only made in a limited number of inquiries and bills. Such references are to both binding and non-binding instruments, and typically as part of a general introduction to the subject in question. At the Swedish national level, there is little or no transparent account of a comprehensive analysis in these processes of actual conformity with international obligations between existing laws and proposed ones. The exception is the thoroughness with which the conformity between Swedish legislation and the EU Victims' Rights Directive was assessed. This might be explained by the special and binding character of EU law, and the sanctions available within the EU system for enforcing compliance, an explanation that also finds support in compliance theory on the relevance of the normative strength of instruments and monitoring systems. 137 Arguably, many of the more truly international human rights legal instruments protecting victims of crime are non-binding resolutions and recommendations, establishing political expectations rather than enforceable, actual legal obligations. It is hard to say when a state is in violation of such norms, and the way Sweden handles these instruments without formal assessment in committees of inquiryshows that their normative status leads to less thorough analysis from the national governments' side in relation to victims' rights.
The question this raises is whether the lack of transparent analysis poses a problem. Is there a lack of conformity between Swedish legislation and international law obligations?
The article has highlighted the failure to introduce an obligation to provide information to a victim at their first contact with authorities. Such an obligation should be established in law, in order to comply fully with Sweden's binding commitments imposed by the Victims' Rights Directive. Such information can be of utmost importance in ensuring that victims become aware of their rights, including to report a crime. The explanation might be that the government has failed to recognise that victims' rights legislation is limited to 'injured parties', with the effect that those not yet recognised as such are not given the legal protection to which they are entitled.
Victims' right to reparation and a remedy can be seen as already satisfied by Sweden's rules regarding damages, which allow victims to claim reparations from perpetrators within criminal trials. Yet Swedish law concerning the enforcement of court decisions on damages is unclear, leading to a situation where victims are dependent on the goodwill of legal counsel working pro bono to help enforce their claims. This creates risk of arbitrariness. A Swedish governmental inquiry report in 2007 proposed including taking measures necessary to collect a client victim's compensation in the tasks of his or her legal counsel. 138 The proposal has not inspired new legislation on the topic, somewhat ironically since the same inquiry report also contained a thorough analysis of domestic law's accordance with international legal obligations to protect victims' rights.
Those flaws aside, Swedish law is largely in accord with the international victims' rights requirements and principles in focus here. It would thus appear that the perception of Sweden as a gold standard in the victims' rights area is warranted. As this article also establishes, however, Sweden's current legal compliance with its crime victim protection obligations under international law is mainly the result of the position given to victims of crime under Swedish domestic law as developed historically and quite independently, rather than a strong commitment to analyse conformity and, when needed, to change domestic law in response to international obligations. Obligations therefore come with little sovereignty cost for Sweden, which is another factor that helps explain levels of state compliance generally. 139 Taken together, these findings cause concern about Sweden's future compliance with international victims' norms. Given the continuing development of the international legal framework for victims of crime, it is necessary for states to continuously assess whether their domestic rules are in accordance with international law. This leads us to recent and ongoing legislative reform initiatives causing concern regarding the Swedish government's attitude towards victims of crime. There are signs that Swedish political interest in victims' rights is diminishing, leaving room for potential future violations of its legal obligations to safeguard them. The proposals already madeto limit injured parties' abilities to review decisions on whether to prosecute alleged crimes against them, to bring their own evidence at trial, and to exercise their rights to initiate subsidiary prosecution (see sections 5.2 and 5.4 above)need more serious consideration from the perspective of Sweden's international law obligations towards victims of crime. Recent changes to the law on when one is entitled to publicly provided legal representation, limiting this right to representation at the trial in only the court of first 138 SOU 2007:6, in particular ch 2, discussing the Victim Declaration and numerous other instruments adopted by the UN, the Council of Europe, and the EU. 139 Stern and Österdahl (n 7); Hafner-Burton, Mansfield and Pevehouse (n 7). instance, need evaluation from the same perspective. These initiatives appear to be driven by efficiency and processing imperatives for criminal justice, without much consideration of other imperatives, such as the victims' perspective. Perhaps the disinclination to thoroughly analyse conformity has been unproblematic historically because of the traditionally strong position of victims. There was, so to say, nothing at stake. However, the same disinclination is problematic if political ideas to weaken the position of victims' take hold, because it may result in failure to comply with the international norms in the future.
In order to secure compliance, Sweden should consider taking both binding and nonbinding instruments more seriously in its legislative drafting processes. A start would be for the government to include an assessment of international obligations in its binding general instructions appointing new committees of inquiry. 140 Today assessment of correspondence with international law commitments is not included in these general instructions. Adding that would provide a basis for stronger commitment to international law in the legislative process.
Another way forward, suggested by scholars, is to establish a special mechanism tasked with reviewing implementation of victims' rights, such as a Victims' Rights Commissioner. 141 Sweden recently established a Human Rights Institute, one responsibility of which is to monitor, investigate, and report on how human rights are respected and realised in Sweden. 142 Perhaps adding another mechanism at this point would be premature. Rather, the Institute should be involved, in addition to the Crime Victim Authority, in consulting rounds for all legislative inquiries affecting victims of crime. The Institute could also take initiative on empirical studies on implementation and compliance and lobby for the government to get more involved in international human rights law, for instance through its directives to committees of inquiry. Taking these suggested measures could help Sweden to continue setting a 'gold standard'.