Två regeringar – ett språk? : Symboliska och moraliska uttryck i svensk kriminalpolitik

Sammanfattning

This study examines how criminal policy reforms are linguistically legitimised in Swedish government bills during the period 2018–2025. Drawing on theories of symbolic politics and penal populism, it conducts a qualitative, theory-driven text analysis of four criminal policy bills from two governments: the Löfven/Andersson government (2018–2022) and the Kristersson government (2022–2025). Aiming to analyse how criminal policy problems and threat images are constructed, which legitimising strategies dominate the bills, and to what extent similarities and differences between government periods can be understood as expressions of depoliticisation within criminal policy. The analysis is based on four ideal-typical categories —moralising, expert-oriented, symbolic, and instrumental—organised along two analytical dimensions: moralising versus expert-oriented legitimation, and symbolic versus instrumental criminal policy. The findings show that criminal policy problems are primarily framed as serious societal threats related to security, public order, and the rule of law. Reform proposals are mainly legitimised through expert-oriented and instrumental language, through references to legal principles, expert assessments, and procedures. Symbolic expressions mainly serve a framing function, while explicitly moralising language is limited. Despite differences in political leadership, the analysed bills display substantial similarities in legitimising patterns. This suggests a shared criminal policy discourse at the level of government bills, in which ideological distinctions are downplayed in favour of a formalised and institutional mode of justification. The study contributes to a clearer understanding of how criminal policy is legitimised in the legislative process and how depoliticisation may be articulated through language in formal policy documents.