353 alse^ found variations whereby, for example, Sweden maintained local and administrative traditions while Norway and in particular Denmark placed greater weight on the state’s judicial and penal procedure systems. Part VII summarises the results and analysis them from a theoretical, broad perspective. The examination has indicated that the dualism of Swedish lawrelating to reactions to juvenile crime and social history arose as part of a larger historical process, a process which embraced more than social and penal law. The distinctive Swedish system has a philosophical and legislative history which originate much earlier than the late 1890’s. The development of the legislative history is related with the general political history and with conceptual and ideological developments. In former times the family, or the household, was in the ideal case a cohesive unit for both upbringing, supervision, control and material production for the household consumption. The family and employment relationship was considered to embrace a number of functions which in the 19th century were legally distinct in the law relating to the maintenance of order and safety, family law, labour law, administrative law, criminal law and the embryonic social law. The provisions in the Penal Code of 1864 concerning “public” reformatories for non-punishable offenders prompted the question of where the limit should lie between on the one hand the state public sector and on the other hand philanthropic or municipal private societies. What was meant by “public”? Was the upbringing of juvenile offenders, its administration and finance, a task for the central authorities or for the local communities? Those opposing the increase of state involvement refereed to ideological motives that justice required that the crime was succeeded by punishment and that the determination of the termshould not he put into the hands of administrative authorities. But socio-economic, tactical reasons were also said to require the consolidation of the care for the innumerable transgressors who were younger than 15 years. The state authorities expressed quite simply a mistrust of the civil society’s and the municipal preparedness to take necessary measures and a fear that they would postpone the provision of care in anticipation of the juveniles developing to cases referable to the public, state sector. The characteristic features provide a new insight into the content of the Swedish Reformatory Acts and the history of its origin. The “sociological school’s” influence on the 1902 legislation seems to have been overestimated in Swedish literature. Further it is difficult to find support for the hypothesis that the Acts were an expression of the increased humanitarianismin society or the breakthrough of beliefs concerning the treatment of offenders. The intervention of the state ultimately took the form of legislation, budgetary allocations, inspection and the establishment of special institutions for offenders between
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=