Trafficking in human beings for sexual and other purposes - Polisen

Annex 1 – Reporting by the police authorities54Norrbotten involving the same suspect in which afemale victim submitted similar details to those inVästerbotten. The preliminary investigation concerningunlawful assault was, however, discontinued sincethe offence could not be proven.County of NorrbottenIn January 2011, Haparanda District Court sentenceda 58-year-old man with Finnish citizenship livingin Sweden to fines based on daily income, for procuring82 . The District Court found that the man had,on two occasions, transported Russian women fromFinland to Sweden and conveyed them to male sexpurchasers.One further man was sentenced to a finebased on daily income and a suspended sentence forthe purchase of sexual services.The Court of Appeal changed the District Court’ssentence for the 58-year-old who was instead given afine based on daily income for complicity in the purchaseof sexual services 83 .In June 2011, three people from Romania wereremanded in custody by the district court in Luleå,on probable grounds, on suspicion of aggravatedtheft. The perpetrators specialised in the theft of goldjewellery from elderly people. There were suspicionsthat a 14-year-old Romanian girl who was travellingwith the perpetrators was being forced to committhefts on their behalf.A preliminary investigation was launched againstthe suspected perpetrators of human trafficking forother purposes in order to investigate whether the girlhad been forced to go on the trip for the purpose ofcommitting crimes. Social Services took the girl intocare, under the Act (1990:52), relating to the Care ofYoung Persons (Specific Provisions) despite her parents,who had travelled from Romania, contradictingthis. The Administrative Court confirmed that the82 Haparanda District Court 22.02.2011, Case no. 974-10.83 The Court of Appeal for Upper Norrland 07.06.2011, Case noB 244-11.girl should be taken into care. The parents appealedagainst this ruling to the Administrative Court ofAppeal which refused the appeals. Instead, theAdministrative Court of Appeal referred the decisionto competent authorities in the girl’s home countryunder the Brussels II Regulation (Article 8.1) 84 . Thisarticle means that a Swedish court has no jurisdictionin matters of parental responsibility if it can be investigatedin the country in which the child is domiciled.Taking the girl into care was upheld in compliancewith the Administrative Court of Appeal ruling andshe was reunited with her parents. The competentcourt in the girl’s home country was informed of theAdministrative Court of Appeal’s ruling by the SwedishMinistry of Foreign Affairs. The preliminaryinvestigation into human trafficking was closed inDecember 2011 since no crime could be proven.County of VästernorrlandIn 2011, a preliminary investigation was initiated concerninghuman trafficking for forced labour. The caseconcerned three people from Vietnam (aged 24, 36and 39) who were lured to Sweden with promises ofwork at a Thai restaurant. All were given a work permitby the Swedish Migration Board. To be able topay for the trip to Sweden victims were forced to borrowmoney in their home country. After nearly a yearin Sweden, they contacted the police and told themabout non-existent jobs and work at lower levels ofpay than had been agreed. Prosecutors discontinuedthe case in January 2012 since it was unclear whetherany exploitation had taken place. The injured-partieswere later given assistance by social services to travelback to their homeland.In October 2011, a man in his 30s from Sundsvallwas sentenced by Sundsvall District Court to a sus-84 Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcementof convictions in matrimonial matters and matters of parentalresponsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000.