This lawyer did something few dare to do. She has openly criticised the Swedish child protection services, even abroad.

Now the courts in western Sweden are letting her suffer financially. And as an excuse they are saying that “she is unsuitable”, a description the lawyer herself says has put a stop to her career.

Gothenburg, Sweden – sfm.no

Published in Norwegian on March 8, 2004
Re-published in English on January 14, 2005
Text and all photos: Jan Hansen - sfm.no
Translation: Anna-Stina Ponsford

A little about her background

Ruby Harrold-Claesson was born in Jamaica in 1947. There she went through traditional primary and secondary schooling on to A-levels. The French government gave her a scholarship and she studied law and political sciences over a period of four years.

While she was a student she met her Swedish husband, they settled down in Sweden and later on started a family. In 1986 she started her Swedish law studies, 6 years later she started her own private law practise. And in 1994 she obtained her degree of Master of Laws at Gothenburg University.

The lawyer Ruby Harrold-Claesson has great respect for the Swedish laws, laws she feels ought to be adhered to – also by the courts. Photograph Jan Hansen- smf.no

A cut above the rest
Apart from her extremely good international legal foundation and excellent grades at the University of Gothenburg, she also did additional studies in civil case law. Here she achieved grades which were far higher than average.
Since 1996, in addition to being a lawyer, she became the president of the NKMR
(Nordic Committee for Human Rights). She is still chairs the board.

Some of her many achievements, for example the Swedish Master of laws degree and other international acknowledgments.

Compulsory care cases
Ruby Harrold-Claesson reminds one of the civil rights leader Martin Luther King. She is a strong black woman with a great sense of justice and clear cut opinions.
And it was just her clear cut opinions and a great allegiance to the European Convention on Human Rights which gave such totally unexpected consequences for her, at least when it comes to the courts in west Sweden.

Her problems started when became involved in cases concerning the social services taking of children into public care in placing them foster homes. Her first case was in the Swedish town Nässjö in Småland in 1993. The Court stated that the reason for not appointing her as the legal aid representative of a single mother was due to geographical reasons. She nevertheless assisted the mother in the case, which she also won against the local social authority and managed to reach an agreement with Chief Councillor about a reversal of compulsory care of the child.

The social authorities in Nässjö had difficulty accepting this and since then Ruby Harrold-Claesson has been harassed by many. As a lawyer, all she did was to do her job the best she could according to Swedish law, a law she and all other practising lawyers must adhere to. To date the local authorities in Nässjö have still not paid her fees of 97.000:-.

Work ban in the courts in Western Sweden
The lawyer is black and well known all over Sweden also internationally, but evidently not as popular with the judges in courts in western Sweden.

The real problems began however in 1995 when Ruby Harrold-Claesson accepted to plead the cases of two single mothers whose children were wrongfully taken into care by the social services and placed in foster homes. One is the Edner case, where the social services in a suburb in the Municipality of Gothenburg, took the daughter of British citizen, Liz Edner, the child by the way is also a British citizen, and placed her in a Swedish foster home. In both cases Ruby Harrold-Claesson made reference to Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to respect for private and family life. She also reminded the court that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the case Olson v. Sweden had found Sweden guilty of violating the Olsson family's human rights and she informed the court that her client would send a complaint to the ECHR. The presiding judge in the Edner case turned red in the face and he went into a rage. Even in the other case, the judge had a similar reaction. The judges’ reactions made Ruby Harrold-Claesson examine the courts files on the Olsson cases. There she discovered that both judges had delivered four verdicts each against the Olsson family. The court decided to pay her a fraction of the fees that were due for her work in both cases.

The following year, another client from Nässjö wanted Ruby Harrold-Claesson as her legal aid lawyer both in a custody case before the County court for western Sweden and the District Court of Gothenburg. She got to know about the Gothenburg lawyer through an article in a local Småland newspaper dated 20th April 1996: Neither court appointed Ruby Harrold-Claesson as this mother's legal aid lawyer. The work ban was then a fact as she herself experiences her situation.

Excerpts / translation of above document photo:
"For the eventuality that Ruby Harrold-Claesson - even in case the court's decision should gain force of law - is bent on continuing to represent XXX as her lawyer or legal adviser without being appointed as legal aid lawyer, the District Court will eventually take up the question of her suitability to do that taking into consideration the contents of the rules in Chap. 12 sections 2 and 22 of the Code of Procedure."
Stefan Lönqvist


Excerpts / translation of above document photo:
"Finally, as to the addition concerning an eventual later appraisal of Ruby Harrold-Claesson's suitability as a lawyer, the wording should rather be seen as plain information about the existing law. Whether such information as that which appears in the addition was suitable or not is a question of judgement which the Chancellor of Justice has no reason to elaborate on in the present case."
Hans Regnér, Peder Bjursten

Translations of excerpts of decisions from The District court of Gothenburg and from the Chancellor of Justice after the complaint. The CJ did not find any reason to comment.

The lawyer appealed against the decisions all the way to the Supreme Courts, followed up by a complaint to the parliamentary ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice. But nothing changed. The documents that sfm.no ourselves have scrutinised (see also excerpt below) give without a doubt clear indications that this assertive lawyer, must be considered banned, something which is almost unique in Scandinavia. At least as long as they haven’t done anything wrong. And according to Ruby Harrold-Claesson she has not done anything wrong.

Excerpt from court verdict
“Liz Edner has demanded that Ruby Harrold-Claesson should be appointed as her public counsel. In accordance with existing precedence neither the County Administrative court nor the Administrative Court of Appeal in Gothenburg appoint Ruby Harrold-Claesson as public counsel in cases before these courts because she does not meet up to the demands that must be made upon such counsel, among other things that the help given should be effective. Normally, there is no reason to deviate from this precedence which has been upheld consistently. Liz Edner has won her case and she has the right to legal aid provided by public counsel. She has however refused legal aid with any other than Ruby Harrold-Claesson, who at the beginning of this case, while Liz Edner was still in England, helped the court to come in contact with Liz Edner and communicate documents to her and receive answers from her. Even during the latter part of the proceedings Ruby Harrold-Claesson has made the court's contacts with Liz Edner easier. Considering the very special circumstances in the case and the fact that Liz Edner has the right to have her costs financed through legal aid, the County Administrative Court finds that - despite the fast established opinion about Ruby Harrold-Claesson's suitability* as public counsel - there is reason to appoint her as public counsel."

Note from editor: The above text with the title “Excerpt from court verdict” is taken directly from a court verdict signed by Bengt Hasselberg, County Court of Gothenburg. The Editor.

Lawyers and solicitors can be deprived the right to practise
In Sweden, Denmark and Norway lawyers and solicitors can be excluded, but there must be extenuating circumstances. In Norway the body that handles such grievances is the Law and Police department. Firstly the case will be dealt with by the Norwegian Law Society’s own representatives. Ruby Harrold-Claesson guarantees that she has nothing to hide.

Sfm.no. What do you think is the reason for your work ban?

- The reason is that I have openly criticised the Swedish child protection services and the administrative courts. I call it a fundamental system failure. I also make it quite clear that everybody should comply with Swedish law - even the courts. In other words. According to Swedish law and practise, a lawyer who is not appointed as public aid representative in a court case does not have the right to appeal against a court decision that says that she is unsuitable.

Institutionalised racism
- Sfm.no. What does the law society or the lawyers' union say?

- I don’t belong to the law society. To become a member of the “privileged society” I must have a yearly income of at least 500 000 SEK. As I am excluded from practising in courts in the west of Sweden I have not been paid several million kronor in return for working hours, and it’s not likely that I will ever see this money.
- Today the sickness benefits that I am entitled to are on the same level as a house wife and as a consequence I will not receive a pension. This is how the system punishes those who divert in their thinking. The law society has not lifted a finger to help me. For this reason I am now considering demanding them to pay back my previous subscriptions.

- Sfm.no How do your law colleagues react to your exclusion?

- Most of them are shocked, but there is very little they can do. A retired MP is committed to my cause and has tried to engage his own Parliament group. But nobody dares to touch my case. The consequence of this is that the law courts can decide who should represent clients who seek legal aid. Can you imagine what it would be like if Marlene Ottey was refused to run against Marion Jones in a race?

- What is most surprising however is that I have sent three complaints about my work ban to the European Court of Human Rights, and they have all been declared inadmissible. I attribute this to the fact the former Swedish judge at the European court was formerly on the staff of the Administrative Court of Appeal in Gothenburg.

Sfm.no Is it possible that the courts in the west of Sweden view you as a rebel or a whistle blower, not least because of your strong attachment to NCHR?

- Personally I experience all this as pure racial discrimination because I don’t have the same skin colour as all other lawyers or solicitors. I am however equally competent if not more competent than many Swedish judges, lawyers and solicitors. I am unfortunately Sweden's only black lawyer and that evidently has a price.

- My strong commitment to the protection of the human rights of children, their parents and relatives in relation to the social states bureaucracy, plays a roll.

- I have considerable experience of judges who cannot stand any mention of the European Convention on Human rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

- Göran Persson “Critics will be branded by the Party”
- Sfm.no Is it true that the current Prime Minister (S) of Sweden once has made the following comment. “Those who criticise Sweden in foreign countries, will be branded by the Party?”

- Yes, that’s right. It was in the summer of 1995, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer. In the spring of 1996 I was interviewed on a Television program in Jamaica. I told about my work and how the Swedish system deals with children and their families. After that I received several telephone calls from people who said they were shocked to hear my revelations of the state of affairs in Sweden. They said that they thought that Sweden was a civilised, democratic country.

- But the work ban which I have been subjected to is not particularly surprising, considering that Hans Corell, now under general secretary to the UN, in an article in The Daily News (Dagens Nyheter) on 26th April 1988 suggested a work ban for Swedish lawyer and medical doctor Siv Westerberg. She is also a founding member of the NCHR. Mrs Westerberg had just won the now world famous case Olsson v. Sweden in the European Court of Human Rights. In addition I am black, a woman, and an immigrant, and I have opinions which are not accepted by the representatives of the Swedish system. But I do feel a great sense of achievement because of having rescued over 30 children from the Swedish social workers.

According to Ruby Harrold-Claesson she still receives a few cases from other parts of Sweden. Sfm.no wish to thank Ruby Harrold-Claesson for this open-hearted interview and we wish her success in the future.

Jan Hansen
Editor Samfunnsmagasinet - www.sfm.no
(The Society Magazine)
Translation: Anna-Stina Ponsford