This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
2025.08.25
Reference response to the Ministry of Justice
SWETIC's Response to the Consultation on Safer Amusement Parks – Interim Report of the Inquiry into Strengthened Supervision of Amusement Parks and a Review of Certain Tasks Performed by the Police Authority (SOU 2025:40) – Case number Ju2025/00874.
The Swedish Association for Testing, Inspection and Certification (SWETIC) has taken note of the report and would like to express the following views:
1. The role of regulations in relation to standards
It is important that it is the regulation that primarily sets the binding requirements. Standards should be used as a tool to specify the level of the requirements. Standards are fundamentally voluntary to follow and their function is to set the level, not to constitute binding law in themselves. The regulation should therefore clearly state the requirements, and reference to the standard should only be made where justified.
2. Requirements for existing, commissioned objects
If a standard is changed, this should not entail retroactive requirements for objects already in operation, unless the intention is explicitly to introduce such requirements. This has happened in Norway where the regulatory authority Jernbanetillsynet has acted in this way. This is important to avoid unreasonable conversion costs and to provide legal certainty for operators.
3. Modernization and replacement of parts (clarification of Section 6 of the bill))
When modernizing or replacing parts, it is important that the regulation clearly states what applies. SWETIC believes that the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning's formulation is a suitable starting point: ”When modifying a motor-driven device or replacing a certain part of the device, the modified or replaced part must comply with the applicable requirements.” This provides both clarity and predictability for control bodies and operators.
A suitable description of what a change is could be – change of the basic conditions of the device. If this concept is found in a regulation or law, there are good conditions for clarifying in a regulation with clear guidelines for when an audit inspection should be required. Examples of such guidelines could be:
- Change in the maximum number of passengers or the physical characteristics of the passengers.
- Change of speed.
- Change of load-bearing parts.
- Change of machinery.
- Change of control system.
- Software modification.
- Other changes of equivalent importance to safety.
4. Inspection after moving to a new location
SWETIC would like to draw attention to the fact that the proposed wording of Section 7 can be interpreted so that a fixed fairground installation may be put into use after dismantling and reassembling or moving to a new location based solely on self-inspection, and that an accredited assembly inspection can take place up to one year later. This means that the installation can be used for a long time before official inspection is carried out, which can entail an unacceptable safety risk. SWETIC proposes that the bill be clarified so that an accredited assembly inspection must take place before a fixed fairground installation that is not intended for mobile operations is put into use, alternatively if the move is included under the requirements for audit inspection.
5. Periodicity of recurring inspection
The current regulations (Regulation 1993:1634) clearly state that an approval is valid for 12 months from the last day of the month in which the inspection was carried out. This provides a clear inspection period that ensures that inspections are carried out at regular and predictable intervals.
The proposed bill lacks such an explicit provision, and only states that periodic inspections shall take place at least once a year.
SWETIC believes that it is necessary to introduce a fixed inspection period, in a similar way to, for example, the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning's regulations BFS 2011:12 or the Swedish Work Environment Authority's regulations AFS 2023:11, Chapter 13, where the validity period is clearly regulated. Introducing a fixed inspection period gives both operators and inspection bodies the opportunity to plan and adapt in a way that benefits everyone during recurring inspections.
This applies provided that the bill forms the basis for developing a regulation that clearly states the length of the inspection period and validity period for approval.
6. Possibility of temporary approval in the event of minor deficiencies
The current regulation (1993:1634) provides for the possibility of granting approval with a shorter validity period when minor deficiencies are identified, provided that these are remedied within a specified period. This possibility is missing from the bill.
SWETIC believes that simple deficiencies that do not have a significant impact on safety – for example, documentation deficiencies, lack of signs or other minor deviations – should not be grounds for the device to be deemed to constitute an immediate hazard. Instead, it should be possible for the owner to remedy these deficiencies at his own risk within a certain period of time, and this should then be checked at the next regular inspection in a manner similar to that prescribed by the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning in BFS 2011:12 for motor-driven devices.
