sou · GWB323 · 2008-04-03 00:00:00 — The conclusion to be drawn is that ever more Swedes are to be found abroad and that in future their numbers can be expected to rise. The question is what official responsibility has to assist its citizens in crises and disaster situations. The point of departure today is that individuals have responsibility for themselves when travelling abroad but that the state, according to current consular regulations, can intervene in emergency situations to give advice, or aid in the form of loans. In future too the guiding principle shall be that individuals who , work or go to live abroad shall do so at their own responsibility and that the state shall engage and lend support only in certain, special circumstances. The individuals responsibility includes, for example, having insurance to cover possible damages that may occur. However, experiences from the disaster and the crisis show that it is not always easy to decide the borderline between private and public undertakings. As regards the other actors involved, agencies have a responsibility in law (1992:1672) concerning charter holidays and the guarantee law (1972:204). However, many people nowadays without consulting a agent. Insurance companies can be important actors in cases where those affected have taken out insurance. insurance is common in because it is usually included in home insurance, held by over 96 percent of the population. insurance usually covers, among other things, costs in case of sudden illness or accident, and repatriation of injured or deceased persons. The insurance companies have their own international emergency service centre which, among other things, receives reports and arranges repatriation for sick persons. According to existing consular practice, the public sector can act through the Swedish Foreign Ministry authority in the country concerned to provide Swedes in distress in the first instance with help in helping themselves but also with economic aid in the form of loans, in accordance with the law on consular economic aid (2003:491). Thus the states responsibility in this connection is to be a last resort for help, for example in arranging a journey home. The present consular regulations are applied also in the event of a disaster that concerns many people and when the host countrys resources are severely stretched. However, as was shown by the disaster and the crisis, the consular regulations do not readily adapt to cope with situations in which many people need help and there is competition for resources. We can state that at any given moment there are a great number of Swedes abroad and this influences public expectations concerning the states role. During the disaster many of the Swedes involved assumed that the Swedish state would quickly come to their rescue. They were severely disappointed when these expectations were not fulfilled in every respect. At the same time, the public and the media may have greater expectations of the state than it is reasonable to assume. It is therefore important to underline that the states responsibility when it comes to disaster aid comes into effect only in very special situations and that the states contribution is a complement to the resources provided by the host country, the individuals insurance company and . The states responsibility for disaster aid can be compared with the principles guiding the national rescue services in which the state and local authorities maintain an organisation that can intervene when an individual, either by himself or with the help of others, cannot cope with an accident. In the same way the state should have responsibility for maintaining an organisation with preparedness to intervene and support Swedes in crises and disasters abroad, i.e. in extraordinary situations. Such preparedness has also been under construction since the disaster. This means, among other things, that the Foreign Ministry now has a completely different organisation and preparedness, with, for example, a rapid deployment force for crisis situations. The Swedish Foreign Ministry authority in the country concerned can also be supported by a support force which is a collaboration between the , the and and which also involves the Swedish Red Cross, Save the Children and the Swedish Church. The states responsibility for disaster aid is therefore primarily to maintain an organisation and to be prepared, as a complementary actor, to support Swedes abroad. The greater part of the costs arising from this will naturally be borne by the state but this need not prevent an individual from taking economic responsibility for contributions made directly on his or her behalf. When does the state have a responsibility to provide disaster aid? The answer should be based on the fact that disaster aid is humanitarian and that the state needs to take measures to protect the lives of individuals and lessen suffering. Those events that might call for disaster aid include natural disasters, terrorist attacks, technological accidents, infections and wars, but it is not possible to predict all the situations that might arise in future. Among other things, climate change may give rise to events that we have no means of predicting today. Each individual event is unique and has differing consequences, which is why it is not possible to make decisions based simply on the character of the event. However that character can give an indication of whether preparedness should be heightened before an eventual intervention. The judgement should primarily be concentrated on the consequences of the event, consequences which, naturally, influence one another. people been killed and injured, or is there a risk of this? How many Swedes are affected? What is needed: evacuation, care or temporary accom- modation? Might other Swedish organisations be called upon to meet these needs? For example, agencies, insurance companies, or employers? Does the country affected have sufficient resources? Other circumstances to be taken into account are that the situation was unpredictable and the individual affected through no fault of his own. What also needs to be considered is whether disaster aid is practically possible, for example with regard to the security situation. In the final analysis a considered judgement is needed, taking account of all known circumstances and a decisive factor is whether the need for accommodation, evacuation and other measures could be satisfied in another way, i.e. if other resources are enough to cater for those affected. judgement on the need for resources calls for good contacts with the host country, the industry and with the insurance industrys emergency services centre. basis for the judgement will in all likelihood still be uncertain. As a guiding principle in reaching a decision, the argument must be that if there are well founded grounds for believing that an intervention is necessary, then such an intervention should be made. However, a precondition is that such an intervention is possible with regard to security. How much responsibility does the state have to give disaster aid? What measures can be taken as part of disaster aid? Experiences from the disaster and the crisis show that evacuation of both injured and noninjured citizens from the disaster area and similarly the transport home of the deceased are measures that should be given priority. In most of those affected could home using means provided by agencies but the states contribution was a necessary complement. In questions concerning transport of deceased persons the insurance companies played a key role. During the crisis the state evacuation was crucial in that it made it possible for Swedes to leave the area in a security situation that did not permit ordinary civilian transport. The degree of a state evacuation can thus vary but it is important that the state acts to create a comprehensive transportation capacity which can then be modified, depending on the way events unfold and the needs that exist, for example for the transport of people who have been injured. The disaster also shows the importance of the roles played by agencies and insurance companies in arranging transport and shows too that there is a need for a structured collabo-ration between the state and these organisations. Other measures may be needed, such as health care, food and emergency accommodation, though it may be difficult to specify in advance exactly what these will be. The golden rule in deciding the extent of these other measures is to weigh up all the practical needs of the people affected by a specific disaster. A certain amount of improvisation is for that reason unavoidable. For example, in the disaster, the need for advanced health care was on a completely different scale to that experienced dur-ing the crisis. There were also different basic needs, such as for clothing. is also of great importance that the assessment of what is needed is made by persons who work with such questions on a daily basis. The extent of the aid is thus connected with how best these needs are to be met. It is quite possible that the host country, the agencies, insurance companies and volunteer organisations can deal with the requirements of those affected and that the focus for the Swedish state should be to arrange out of the disaster area in cases where this problem cannot be solved in any other way. A disaster can also have its origin in an infectious disease, for example in the form of a pandemic, or in a terrorist attack. If limited resources combine with the fact that Swedes cannot be evacuated because of the risk of infection, we find ourselves confronting one of the worst imaginable scenarios. Our proposal embraces such an event but the handling of a situation in which Swedes have been infected abroad is complex and requires special insight and expertise. Preparedness and planning for such an eventuality requires expert consideration beyond the scope of this report. Who shall be covered? Swedish citizens domiciled in be covered by disaster aid, along with refugees and stateless persons living in , comparable to the principal groups covered by the law on consular economic aid. In addition, foreigners other than refugees and stateless people who are living in would be covered. It would be odd if persons actually living in were to be denied help when they in any case would be returning to the country. This will for example be persons with permanent permits for and other Nordic citizens. The conclusions we draw as regards dual nationality, or cases of people who have moved, or returned abroad, is that this should be of no particular importance in deciding who should benefit from disaster aid. The deciding factor is that this is an exceptional, extreme situation involving chaos and panic and that the state has intervened for humanitarian reasons. In such circumstances it cannot be reasonable to deny help to persons with a connection to . Therefore, even Swedish citizens who are living abroad should be covered by disaster aid, and so too foreign family members of Swedish citizens, i.e. husbands and wives, partners or persons they are living with, and children under 18. Where should an evacuation be made? Firstly, discussion may centre on whether an evacuation should be to or to a safe haven in the country affected or a neighbouring country. Concerning evacuation of injured persons it is difficult to imagine, bearing in mind the need for aid, how such people could be evacuated merely to the first available safe haven in the area. This would conflict with the humanitarian principle which is the point of departure for disaster aid. Even non- injured people are going to find themselves in a very trying situation and to leave such people in an alien environment is not ethically defensible. The final goal for an evacuation should there- fore be whenever possible. In certain situations, for example in cases of infectious disease, other considerations may have to be taken into account. What should be the scope of an evacuation? Responsibility for property is that of the individual concerned and should be dealt with through private insurance. In cases where disaster aid is given, only personal effects for which there is room in ordinary aircraft hand baggage can be taken aboard. This rule should also apply even if the evacuation is by another means of transport than air. We dont feel that any form of notification needs to be instituted as regards foreign . Such information would in all likelihood be incomplete and in all probability no more reliable than that which, in the event of a disaster, can be provided by agencies and relatives at home in . Such notification could furthermore create expectations of state aid, expectations which might not always be realised. Instead, it is important to institute in advance a procedure for handling information when a disaster occurs. A dividing line can be drawn between responsibility for seeing that aid is provided and economic responsibility. This means that in time of widespread crisis or disaster, the state takes responsibility for the aid to be given and also for the greater part of the costs, while the individual has responsibility for those costs that directly affect him or her. We consider that it is important with an individual obligation to reimburse the state to emphasise personal responsibility and the importance of insurance. Possibilities for travellers to insure themselves are good and the insurance industry has taken a benevolent attitude in interpretation of insurance conditions. other approach as regards individual responsibility increases the risk of the states responsibility developing from a responsibility in extraordinary situations to a responsibility in more common circumstances. What mitigates against the obligation to reimburse is primarily the practical consideration that extra resources may have to be allotted for an administration to enforce it. However, such problems should not be exaggerated. As a third party, the state obviously cannot demand reimbursement from the insurance companies; rather, such demands must be aimed at individual persons. However, the obligation to reimburse draws attention to the need for insurance. With this in place, the state can make its demand and inform the individual of the need to involve his or hers insurance company, giving the company authorisation to represent him or her when it comes to settlement. Such a system would at least partially eliminate the need for administration and for trying contacts between state and individual. People who are uninsured should also be asked to reimburse. If consular disaster aid is given to someone under 18, the guardian of that person also shall have the obligation to reimburse. The costs that can be subject to the obligation to reimburse are for transport, including transport of deceased persons, and for health care administered directly for the benefit of specific persons. However, as it may be difficult to establish transport costs for each person evacuated after the event, the amount should be comparable to the cheapest form of transport from the country concerned home to . The reimbursement of health care costs and costs for transport of deceased persons should specify the actual costs but if this is not possible these reimbursement demands should be Reimbursement for the transport of deceased persons should be paid from the estate of such persons. It should be emphasised that these costs will eventually be paid by the in- surance of such persons. An equalisation rule should be worked out for specific deserving cases. For there to be an efficient method to deal with obligations for reimbursement, smoothly functioning cooperation between the public sector and the insurance companies is vital both before and after a disaster. Insurances are the concern of individuals and not of groups of Swedish travellers, which is why the insurance companies should at an early stage when a disaster has occurred have discussions with the state about for instance transport of injured and deceased persons. The companies also need to know which of the people they have insured that are affected. Even if the companies may find it difficult to act operationally in cases of war, such as the crisis, this shouldnt hinder the companies resources and contacts being put to good use, provided plans for cooperation have been made in advance. Concerning the role of agencies in this facet of disaster relief, they already have a responsibility according to rules laid down in laws on charter and guarantees. These rules still apply. Entry to and the granting of visas Disaster aid with evacuation, according to our proposal, can put a focus on entry to and the granting of visas under the Aliens Act (2005:716) if the evacuation includes foreign members of families of Swedish citizens. During the crisis visas were granted but, as a basis for estimating future numbers, the experience is flawed because we cannot be certain how many visas were issued. In our contacts with persons on the ground in and with representatives of no for changes in practice were expressed. On the other hand a number of practical problems were encountered because there was no Swedish Foreign Ministry authority in . Guidelines are needed for the practical granting of visas and identity control in evacuation situations. However, our conclusion is that policy laid down by the Aliens Act worked during the crisis and there are no reasons to suggest change. Economic consequences of the proposal It is impossible to make any accurate estimate of costs for future disaster aid. However, it is reasonable to assume costs may be comparable with those of the disaster and crisis, 157 and respectively. At the same time, this should be with the reservation that future costs may be considerably higher. A situation involving the outbreak of an infectious disease might call for considerably more exhaustive action, bearing in mind the risk of the disease spreading. The amount the state might get back from individual reimbursement is important but also difficult to estimate. The total costs of disaster aid could rise to at least . To finance such aid a government decision would be necessary to allow the Foreign Ministry to exceed allotment 5:4 for such measures. The administrative costs for demanding reimbursement from individuals will mostly comprise payment and maintenance of staff. This is also hard to estimate because it depends, among other things, on what role the insurance companies will take when it comes to settlement. The question of an individuals obligation to reimburse must be regulated by law. It is possible to do this by introducing a specific rule in the law on consular economic aid. As regards the question as to whether legislation is otherwise needed we feel the states actions in a crisis should be regulated by law and that a decision- making process should be decided in advance, in as much as this is possible. Furthermore, we consider that existing consular statutes are insufficient and as a result rules concerning disaster aid need to be set out in law as a specific form of consular support. The states contribution in such situations should be referred to as consular disaster aid to distinguish it from other consular support. The decision to grant consular disaster aid should be made by the government. The question is of such fundamental importance that it requires the taking of a political stance. A decision on such aid will be de-pendent on a parallel decision by government to grant the necessary means. However it is important to emphasise that it should then be the Foreign Ministry that decides how resources should be used, although it may be possible that even questions of practical application should be decided by the government when there is a difficult balance to be struck, involving complex prioritising that makes such a decision, in the final analysis, political; or when the questions may have international consequences. Förslag till lag om konsulär katastrofinsats Vid allvarlig kris eller katastrof utomlands skall en konsulär katastrofinsats genomföras av staten för att bistå enskilda om förut- sättningarna enligt denna lag är uppfyllda. Bestämmelser om konsulärt ekonomiskt bistånd till enskilda utomlands finns i lagen (2003:491) om konsulärt ekonomiskt bistånd. En konsulär katastrofinsats skall genomföras vid allvarlig kris eller katastrof utomlands om behoven av skydd, evakuering och andra åtgärder med hänsyn till händelsens karaktär, följder och omständ- ligheterna i övrigt inte kan tillgodoses på annat sätt. Bestämmelser om katastrofmedicinska insatser utomlands finns i lagen () om katastrofmedicinska insatser i utlandet vid en stor olycka eller katastrof. Vem som omfattas av en konsulär katastrofinsats En konsulär katastrofinsats kan omfatta 2.svenska medborgares utländska familjemedlemmar 3.flyktingar och statslösa personer som är bosatta i 4. en annan i bosatt utlänning än som avses i punkt 3. Vid tillämpning av denna lag skall frågan om någon är bosatt i avgöras enligt bestämmelserna om bosättning i i 2 kap. socialförsäkringslagen (1999:799). Beslut om konsulär katastrofinsats Beslut om konsulär katastrofinsats fattas av regeringen. Den som omfattas av en konsulär katastrofinsats skall betala ersätt- ning till staten. Om en konsulär katastrofinsats omfattat någon som är är även vårdnadshavaren skyldig att betala ersättning. Om en konsulär katastrofinsats omfattat transport av avliden skall den avlidna personens dödsbo betala ersättning för tran- sporten. Ersättningsskyldighet enligt 6 § får jämkas eller efterges om det finns särskilda skäl med hänsyn till den ersättningsskyldiges per- sonliga eller ekonomiska förhållanden samt omständigheterna i övrigt. Frågor om ersättning till staten prövas av . Belopp enligt 6 § som inte betalas skall lämnas för indrivning. Vid indrivning får verkställighet enligt utsökningsbalken ske. Bestäm- melser om indrivning finns i lagen (1993:891) om indrivning av statliga fordringar m.m. Regeringen får föreskriva att indrivning inte behöver begäras för ringa belopp. Regeringen eller den myndighet som regeringen bestämmer får meddela närmare föreskrifter om konsulär katastrofinsats. Beslut om ersättningsskyldighet får överklagas hos allmän för- valtningsdomstol. Prövningstillstånd krävs vid överklagande till kammarrätten. Denna lag träder i kraft . 1 Kommitténs uppdrag m.m. Allt fler svenskar befinner sig utomlands och de senaste årens hän- delser, såsom flodvågskatastrofen 2004 och Libanonkrisen , har aktualiserat frågan om vilket ansvar svenska staten har när det gäller att bistå de svenskar som berörs av sådana händelser. Kom- mittén har därför fått i uppdrag att utreda omfattningen av statens ansvar i förhållande till den enskilde, försäkringsbolag och rese- arrangörer. En första förutsättning enligt våra direktiv är att händelsen kräver insatser som går utöver det vanliga konsulära biståndet. Det handlar således om statens ansvar att agera vid extra- ordinära situationer. Vidare är direktiven inriktade på frågan om statens ansvar för att genomföra en evakuering. Det är naturligtvis ofta så att en snabb hemresa är ett prioriterat önskemål för de drabbade men det finns rimligen även andra behov. Förutom behov av sjukvård kan det finnas behov av t.ex. inkvartering i väntan på evakuering samt till- gång till mat och kläder. Vidare kan det finnas frågor som är för- knippade med själva evakueringen på så sätt att om de inte blir lösta kan evakuering inte ske, t.ex. transport av svårt skadade personer. Kommittén använder därför uttrycket katastrofinsats i stället för evakuering. Vilka åtgärder som kan innefattas i en katastrofinsats återkommer vi till i avsnitt 4.1. Vissa andra frågor är uttryckligen undantagna i direktiven.