Case No. B 1195-13 – C.J. through the Prosecutor General v. R.Z.

R.Z. sexually assaulted his female partner, C.J., with his fingers. During this action, R.Z. threatened to hurt her. In their testimony, the parties both said that he had done so to check whether the plaintiff had been cheating. The question was thus whether the act could be considered non-sexual. However, under the Swedish Penal Code, one of the prerequisites for an act to be classified as rape (Chapter 6 Section 1 first paragraph) or the subsidiary, sexual compulsion (Chapter 6 Section 2), is that it must be sexual. The Supreme Court considered whether the defendant’s intention could affect whether the act was a sexual act under the Swedish Penal Code. The Supreme Court ruled that it was inherently sexual. The intention behind the act does not matter. Furthermore, without the victim’s consent, the act constitutes a serious violation of her sexual integrity. The Supreme Court further found that the sexual act can be compared to sexual intercourse, which is another prerequisite for the act to be considered rape. Hence, the Supreme Court ruled that R.Z.’s act should be classified as rape.