Trafficking in human beings for sexual and other purposes - Polisen

3. Criminal Development32In summer 2007 the girl was handed over from Swedento the social services authorities in Bulgaria. Atthe start of 2009, an arrest warrant was raised for thealleged uncle, in his absence, and a description circulatedinternationally with a request for extradition toSweden. In June 2010, he was arrested in Bulgariaand was extradited to Sweden in July of that sameyear. In April 2011, he was convicted by the DistrictCourt to four years’ imprisonment and ten years’deportation for human trafficking and aggravatedtheft. In questioning at the District Court, the girlstated that the thefts were her idea, but the DistrictCourt considered this to be ruled out, bearing inmind her young age and considered the girl to havebeen used as a means of carrying out the thefts. TheCourt of Appeal confirmed the district court’s judgementwhich also included damages of SEK 50,000 forthe girl.In June 2011, three persons from Romania wereremanded in custody by the district court in Luleå,on grounds of probability, suspected 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 had been forced to committhefts on their behalf.A preliminary investigation concerning humantrafficking for other purposes was initiated into thesuspected perpetrators, in order to investigate whetherthe girl had been forced to go on the journey inorder to commit crime. Social Services took the girlinto care under the Act (1990:52) relating to the Careof Young Persons (Special Provisions) despite herparents, who had travelled from Romania, beingopposed to this. The Administrative Court ruled thatthe girl should be taken into care. The parents submittedan appeal against the judgement to theAdministrative Court of Appeal which refused theappeals. Instead the Administrative Court of Appealreferred the decision to competent authorities in thegirl’s home country by virtue of the Brussels II Regulation(Article 8.1) 44 . This article means that a Swedishcourt has no jurisdiction in matters of parentalresponsibility if it can be investigated in the countryin which the child is domiciled. The decision to takethe girl into care was cancelled in compliance withthe Administrative Court of Appeal ruling and shewas reunited with her parents. The competent courtin the girl’s home country was informed of theAdministrative Court of Appeal’s ruling by the SwedishMinistry of Foreign Affairs. The preliminaryinvestigation on human trafficking was closed inDecember 2011 since no crime could be proven.In December 2011, a 42-year-old man was prosecutedat the Solna District Court for human trafficking,attempted rape, unlawful threats and assault. Theman had smuggled a 16-year-old Romanian girlthrough Europe in a private car and then housed herin a caravan at the Solvalla camp site. The girl waskept under constant surveillance and was forced tosteal items such as food and tobacco that the manthen sold on. On at least one occasion the manattempted to force the girl to practice oral sex on himand also assaulted her.The man was sentenced to a year in prison forattempted rape but was acquitted on other counts 45 .The court dismissed the indictment for human traffickingsince the prosecutor could not prove that thereason for transporting her to Sweden and housingher there was to commit thefts. The Court of Appealconfirmed the District Court sentence 46 .3.4 Child trafficking for sexual purposesoutside Sweden’s bordersOne type of crime that ought to be given increasedattention is the sexual exploitation of children in othercountries by Swedish nationals, the so-called childsex trade. This type of crime involves a person, usual-44 Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003.45 Solna District Court 29.12. 2011, Case no B 9980-11.46 Svea Court of Appeal 02-03-2012, Case no. 756-12.