MPs debated LSU - "In rare cases, have to keep people locked in"

According to LSU, a person can be detained for up to a year and sentenced to deportation without being convicted of any crime and without knowing what is behind the charges. Swedish Democrat legal spokesman Adam Marttinen believes that the time limit for LSU should be completely removed.

- As the distant time limit approaches and they are released, they come out as heroes and reinforce this problem with extremism. We will work to get to diplomatic solutions where we can ensure that they can return to their home countries, or other countries with which we can find agreements, ”he says.

Although it is not the best solution, there is sometimes no other solution than depriving people of freedom who are considered a threat to the country, says Center Party's spokesperson Johan Hedin.

- It doesn't feel like an attractive solution, but in rare cases you might have to keep people locked in, he says.

Leftist judicial spokesperson Linda Snecker sees two problems with current legislation: the transparency of the evidence and who decides whether people are deported or not.

- Today it is politically appointed ministers who decide in something that is very similar to a court case. I don't think it should be so in a rule of law like Sweden. I think it should be legal judges who decide such cases. Therefore, the Left Party wants to transfer this process to the administrative court and bring it to court instead, she says.

An investigation is currently preparing proposals for how people who are deprived of liberty under LSU legislation can be better controlled.

Because most people who are detained with the help of LSU cannot be deported to their home countries for security reasons, the people should instead be kept under surveillance, says Linda Snecker.

- I rather believe in electronic surveillance in the form of footcuff and reporting duty to the police.