2.1. What is unlawful influence?
Unlawful influence is a collective term for harassment, threats, violence, vandalism, improper offers, improper relationships, or attempts at corruption aimed at overriding democratically established rules (Brå, 2005, 2016b). The influence can be directed at a large array of actors, such as public administration, businesses, elected officials and journalists. In public administration, unlawful influence refers to actions carried out by an external actor with the aim of influencing a public official into not performing their duties or carrying them out incorrectly. The influence can also be directed at the family or other close associates of the public official. The influence can occur either through actions that are criminal or illegal (unlawful influence), or through actions that are merely improper (undue influence) (Brå, 2016b).
According to Brå (2025b, p. 11), for an act to be considered unlawful influence, it must be intended to pressure an employee into breaking rules, altering decisions or otherwise acting against the interests of the organisation. In this view, all threat and violence against public officials is serious, but does not necessarily constitute unlawful influence. The influence does, however, not need to be successful, that is, the official does not need to be influenced for it to qualify as unlawful influence.
Legally, however, the concept is approached somewhat differently. Unlawful influence is not a defined legal term in criminal law in the Nordic countries and must therefore be addressed through other criminal provisions, for example as offences against public officials. However, all forms of threats and violence against public officials are considered as attempts to influence the actions of an official (for Finland, see Finnish Government, 2025). In this context, the question of intent is not used as a determining factor.
Unlawful influence constitutes a continuum of acts that differ in their degree of seriousness. A particularly serious form of unlawful influence is influence through insiders, infiltrators or professional enablers. These individuals use their skills and expertise, facilities, vehicles or authority of their employer or client, to assist individuals in organised crime (Brå, 2024; Gunnarson, 2023). Infiltration attempts are often subtle and not even necessarily illegal, and these are rarely reported to the police and therefore seldom addressed within the justice system (Brå, 2025b). Often, these influencing actions are carried out within legal business structures, which makes them difficult to trace and prevent. Furthermore, as countries have different definitions of suspicious actions it is challenging to assess the risks (OECD, 2021).
The latest handbook on unlawful influence by Brå (2025b, pp. 33–36), highlights that certain professional roles and tasks are particularly vulnerable to infiltration. These include:
Employees making decisions affecting people’s life situations
Employees working in areas where criminal networks or extremist groups are active
Employees in supportive and therapeutic roles where regular, long-term contact is central to the work
Employees that have access to sensitive information of interest to criminal networks
Employees working alone, particularly in situations involving single case management, solo inspections or working alone in e.g. youth centres without colleagues nearby
Employees in smaller organisations, as the risk of friendship-based corruption or other questionable relationships may be higher due to shorter geographic and social distances between officials and residents/users
Employees with limited experience, dissatisfaction with the work and private or social vulnerability
Unlawful influence has effects on the individual, organisational and societal level. At the individual level, unlawful influence contributes to unsafe work environments, with those exposed to threats and harassment experiencing, for example, stress and anxiety (Brå, 2025c; Riksrevisionen, 2022). The effect is particularly pronounced when the influencing actor possesses a high capacity for violence (Brå, 2016b, 2025c). At an organisational level, the consequences include the risk of employees refraining from making decisions or carrying out tasks due to fear of negative repercussions, incorrect decisions, and difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff in occupations particularly exposed to influence (Brå, 2016b; 2025c; see also Gunnarson, 2023). At societal level, the trust and functioning of public institutions, and in the end democracy, is at stake if they can be unlawfully influenced.
2.2. Unlawful influence from organised crime
In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to the threat of unlawful influence from organised crime in the Nordic countries. The evolution of organised criminal networks together with technological advancements, particularly those that make it easier to contact authorities and individual employees, have contributed to increased attention to this issue (SOU 2024: 1). At least in Sweden, there have been indications that organised crime is engaging in unlawful influence to an increasing extent (Polismyndigheten, 2023).
A defining feature of the unlawful influence by organised crime is its capacity for violence, its intimidation capital. This means that such groups can employ subtle methods that do not involve explicit threats or direct violence, making attempts at influence more difficult to detect and address (Brå, 2025c; NOU 2020:4). It has moreover been shown that compared to other actors attempting to influence public officials, individuals involved in organised crime have a more strategic approach (Brå, 2016b).
Influencing public officials is one form of criminal governance exercised by criminal groups, alongside generating fear in the community, coercing legitimate businesses, controlling markets and engaging in community activities. However, international research has shown that only a share of gangs manage to evolve from fear-inducing groups into more complex organisations engaged in criminal governance (Campana et al., 2025). Criminal groups further have varying degrees of willingness and ability to influence administration and politics. Some seek to keep low profile to avoid confrontation with state authorities while others display a clearer ambition and capability to engage with administration and politics. Their strategies can range from open confrontation to consensus and cooperation (Gunnarson, 2023, p. 10).
Gunnarsson (2023, pp. 39–44) argues, in the case of Sweden, that the local level of government is more vulnerable to influence than the national level. In Sweden, as in the other Nordic countries, there is a distribution of extensive welfare resources at the local level, alongside numerous institutional reforms implemented in recent decades and weak municipal auditing and transparency.
2.3. What differs unlawful influence from corruption?
Unlawful influence and corruption are closely related and partially overlapping concepts; corruption can be understood as a specific form of unlawful influence (Brå, 2017). Corruption is often defined as “the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain” (Transparency International, 2026). However, in research, a broader understanding of the phenomena is often employed. This includes “noble cause corruption” in which the focus is on acts “committed in the name of good ends” (Crank & Caldero, 2000, p. 2, see also Kleinig, 1996). Thus, the motivation behind corruption is not always personal gain.
This broader understanding of corruption aligns well with the concept of unlawful influence. For example activities like protection of illegal activities or “fixing” by manipulating the criminal justice system (Roebuck & Barker, 1974) might be defined as corruption as well as unlawful influence. While the study of unlawful influence often has focused on the person being influenced/victimised, corruption research typically concentrates on individuals who knowingly (or unknowingly) engage in improper actions.
The level of corruption in the Nordic countries has generally been described as modest. According to Transparency International's population surveys (2021), very few people in the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland) report having had to pay bribes (<1%), a rate much lower than in other European countries. Also the use of personal connections to receive a service is somewhat lower than in other European countries (Transparency International, 2021). In Finland, structural corruption in its various forms have perceived to be the most common form of corruption, and this is most likely the case also in other Nordic countries (see Ollus & Muttilainen, 2021). Since much of the literature on corruption is relevant for understanding unlawful influence, appropriate parts of it have been included in this report. For instance, police corruption is currently receiving increasing research attention in the Nordics (Thomassen & Strype, 2024), and is relevant to this report.
2.4. Unlawful influence in the justice sector
This report focuses on unlawful influence in the justice sector, meaning the part of public administration that involves the exercise of legal authority, namely the police, the prosecution authority, the courts and the prison and probation services. Control authorities such as the border and coast guard, customs and the tax agency are also affected by unlawful influence. However, these institutions fall outside the scope of this report, primarily due to the limited availability of information and research on them, as well as this project’s limited resources.
Swedish studies have found that especially the police authority, prison and probation service, customs, and prosecution authority are exposed to unlawful influence by organised crime (Brå, 2016b). These agencies are directly involved in disrupting organised crime, and individuals or networks trying to protect their operations therefore target them strategically.
At the same time, it is arguably easier for actors within the justice sector than other public authorities to link an act of influence to organised crime, as they have access to information on criminal records and affiliations with criminal groups (Brå, 2016b). Yet it can still often be hard to distinguish persons involved in organised crime.
Threats against witnesses in court cases have been highlighted as a concern in several Nordic countries (Justitsministeriet, 2017b, 2023; SOU 2023:67). This report primarily focuses on unlawful influence targeting public institutions and officials, and witnesses receive less attention. Nevertheless, their role remains central to understanding unlawful influence within the justice sector.