Language help changes with the agency handling your case
An audit found divergent support models, untranslated decisions and weak quality assurance under one national law.
People who cannot use Swedish well enough to protect their rights meet sharply different language support depending on which national agency handles the case. The variation can decide whether a person understands the evidence, deadline or decision while the same legal right applies.
Listen to this articleNarrated - 9:12
Section 13 of the Administrative Procedure Act requires an authority to use interpreters and translate documents when needed for an individual to exercise their rights. The same law applies across central government.
The National Audit Office found different systems at three agencies. The Social Insurance Agency used professional interpreters, the Pensions Agency often relied on multilingual staff, and the Tax Agency rarely used interpretation in the examined work. Auditors also found untranslated outgoing decisions and weak quality assurance.
Different methods are not automatically unlawful or unequal. The audit covered selected case types and did not measure every person's understanding. Multilingual staff can sometimes provide effective service without a formal interpreter.
The risk appears when administrative convenience determines whether a person understands evidence, deadlines or a decision affecting money and legal status. Rights are difficult to exercise after the decisive information arrives only in inaccessible language.
Each agency should record why support was or was not needed, test whether critical decisions were understood and publish quality results by method. A national right should produce a defensible minimum service even when agencies choose different ways to deliver it.
DailySweden
DailySweden's desk of editors, reporters, researchers and investigative journalists. We bring readers factual, truthful and objective reporting on the issues that matter to them.
Contact the editorial desk ›
