3 MEASURES IN C ASE OF A SUSPEC TED OR CONFIRMED INFEC TION inmates in segregation in different situations and that an extension of this possibility would mean a further restriction of prisoners’ freedoms. She referred to the fact that the Parliamentary Ombudsmen has, on several occasions, highlighted a need to strengthen inmates’ basic right to associate with others during the day. In the opinion of the Parliamentary Ombudsmen, there are reasons in both the Prisons Act and the Remand Prisons Act to define the concept of association and to regulate the scope of inmates’ right to associate with others on a daily basis, and there needs to be a review of the exceptional situations in which the Swedish Prison and Probation Service is able to limit this right. If there is reason to also investigate the amendment that the Swedish Prison and Probation Service has petitioned for, all issues should, in the opinion of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, be thoroughly analysed in one context. The National Board of Institutional Care The National Board of Institutional Care is able to prevent a person from meeting others through a decision on separate care.15 The agency may decide on such care if it is required with regard to a resident’s special need for care, their own safety or the safety of others. Separate care must be adapted to a resident’s individual care needs. A decision on separate care must be assessed continuously and always reviewed within seven days from the last review. In connection with the pandemic, the National Board of Institutional Care introduced a routine according to which people who were suspected or confirmed to be infected with Covid-19 would regularly be provided with separate care. During the inspection of the National Bo15 Section 34 a of the Care of Abusers Act, Section 14 a of the Enforcement of Secure Youth Care Act and Section 15 d of the Care of Young Persons Act. ard of Institutional Care’s special residential home for young people in Tysslinge, Needs for care due it was noted that decisions on separate care due to sus- to Covid-19 are not pected infection of Covid-19 covered by the legal were justified as necessary preconditions for with regard to the person’s separate care special need for care. A decision also stated that staff “experienced” it as if the resident had agreed to the coercive measure. Parliamentary Ombudsman Thomas Norling stated that separate care is a very intrusive measure, and the premise is that such a decision should correspond to the individual having a well-defined need for separate care. The intention is not that the coercive measure should be a resort in handling an emergency situation, but that the need should be foreseeable. The Parliamentary Ombudsman further stated:16 “Based on the statements in the preparatory work, it is clear in my opinion that the provision is aimed at the need for care that has resulted in the person being placed in one of the National Board of Institutional Care’s institutions. The coercive measure, therefore, must be necessary for the purpose of the decision in line with the Care of Abusers Act or the Care of Young Persons Act or in the enforcement according to the Enforcement of Secure Youth Care Act to be achieved. The need for care that may arise as a result of a suspected or confirmed infection of Covid-19 is, therefore, not covered by this legal condition.” 16 See the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s decision of 3 September 2020, ref. no. O 13-2020. – 22 –