In the Court of Appeal's famous ruling, a man was acquitted of child rape as it was not clear what the girl meant by "snippa" - and thus not proved that it was about penetration. The verdict has attracted sharp criticism and now the attorney general wants to try the case in HD.

Unusual trial

According to Anna Kaldal, professor of procedural law at Stockholm University, it is unusual for the Prosecutor General to take cases to hd.

"It says something about the fact that an error has been made, but also that a statement of principle is needed from the Supreme Court," she told SVT.

A statement of principle aims to help the district court and the court of appeals adjudicate similar cases, which is the main reason for review by the Supreme Court. In some special cases, even gross procedural error may be the reason for cases to be tried in HD.

However, Eric Bylander, professor of procedural law at Uppsala University, does not believe that the "snippa case" will be tried due to a procedural error.

"Despite the criticism that can be levelled at this judgment, with good reason, my assessment is that it is not so wrong that the Supreme Court would take up this case on that basis," he told SVT.

Be indicative

Eric Bylander instead emphasizes the need for guidance when it comes to the application of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which became Swedish law in 2020.

– The Supreme Court may need to fill in ambiguities about how the Convention on the Rights of the Child should be applied in Swedish law. The fact that it is a child is in itself significant as there are several legal issues that are unclear about how to proceed when a child is involved, he tells SVT.

Anna Kaldal also believes that the case is particularly interesting because it concerns a child. According to her, a trial can lead to higher demands on the court when it comes to the handling of children in court.

"The Convention on the Rights of the Child requires the court to act more actively when it comes to children," she says, adding:

"In this case, you were unsure and you should have made more effort to understand what the child meant.