No sabotage when demonstrators obstructed traffic

At a demonstration to draw attention to the ongoing climate crisis, the demonstrators sat down on a roadway and obstructed traffic on one of Stockholm's major thoroughfares during rush hour. The question was whether the demonstrators could be convicted of sabotage by seriously disturbing general traffic.

The penal provision on sabotage, which was originally introduced during the Second World War, is primarily characterized by attacks on or threats to vital societal interests such as defence, supplying the needs of the population, justice, administration and public order and security in the country. Sabotage also includes serious disturbances and impediments to general traffic and to the provision of telecommunications, water, heat and electricity.

The District Court convicted the demonstrators of sabotage and disobeying police order, as they did not obey the police's request to end the assembly and get off the roadway. The Court of Appeal has changed the verdict and acquitted the demonstrators of sabotage, as the disturbing of general traffic was not considered serious enough. The verdict stood regarding disobedience of police order.

The Supreme Court has only tried the case in the part that concerns sabotage.

In the judgment, the Supreme Court makes the assessment that what constitutes disturbances and impediments to general traffic (which may relate to significant traffic on roads) must be assessed in the context of the fact that criminal liability for sabotage refers to attacks on and threats to vital public interests. A road blockade of limited time in connection with a demonstration of the kind at issue in the case is not considered qualitatively comparable to attacks on and threats to such vital societal interests as specified in the penal provision. There is therefore no criminal liability for sabotage. The demonstrators are acquitted in that part.

The Supreme Court also points to the importance of the constitutionally enshrined freedom of demonstration and freedom of expression. According to the judgment, it is natural that the penal provision on sabotage in the exercise of these freedoms is applied with the restrictiveness, restraint and proportionality that follows from the provisions of the Instrument of Government with regard to the possibilities of restricting the freedoms.

Case: B 3626-24

Case name

"The climate blockade"

Contact

Press contact

Telephone
08-561 666 30

Email
HDO-Presskontakt@dom.se

 

Updated
2025-12-30