The Protection Gap

There is, rightly, a strong focus on the rights of the accused in criminal proceedings. Those rights are fundamental to a fair justice system.

But where is the equally clear conversation about the rights and interests of the complainant?

Who makes sure the complainant understands the process, knows what matters, is properly informed, and has someone actively protecting their interests when the investigation begins to fail?

In complex cases, particularly long-term domestic abuse, so much of the practical burden already falls on the complainant. A målsägandebiträde (a Swedish-specific legal role providing counsel for the complainant) is supposed to exist within that gap.

Yet when representation is passive or inadequate, the consequences are not confined to poor support. Important evidence may never be raised. Weaknesses in the investigation may remain unchallenged. Context may be lost. And those deficiencies can later strengthen the defence.

The defence lawyer is doing exactly what the defence lawyer should do when those weaknesses are used. The more uncomfortable question is who was protecting the complainant’s interests before those weaknesses became part of the case.

That question stayed with me after a recent conversation with a prominent defence lawyer in Sweden. Looking at the shortcomings that had accumulated throughout the investigation, he put it in one sentence:

What happened to you is every defence lawyer’s dream.