Published: Less than 10 min ago
On Wednesday afternoon, the Riksdag is expected to vote through a controversial constitutional amendment – which has been thoroughly re-debated at the eleventh hour.
Whistleblower Anders Kompass has appealed to the parties to change their minds, but everything points to the law being voted through.
– We stand here with this formulation or none at all, says the Liberals’ Johan Pehrson about the party’s turn of events.
Several media companies have called the proposal for a new spy law “a threat to freedom of expression and democracy”.
The Left Party and the Green Party want the proposal to be postponed for a year so that it can be reviewed. The Liberals also wanted that earlier. But the new governing party has changed its mind.
– For years, the liberals have pointed out the importance of us blocking the possibility of people under false flags risking Swedish democracy, risking the lives of Swedish soldiers. Therefore, it must be tightened, we live in a very, very troubled time, says L leader Johan Pehrson.
He continues:
– We have appealed to the other parties for further clarification, but I have no faith that neither the Center Party, the Social Democrats nor other parties want to shut down Swedish democracy.
Anders Kompass critical
In order for a change to the constitution to be implemented, two separate votes are required with an election in between. In April, the proposal was voted through by the Riksdag, with only the Left Party voting against, and with the Liberals then abstaining.
Johan Pehrson does not believe the warning signals from several reference bodies that the law can make journalists or whistleblowers risk prison terms for having revealed wrongdoing that could damage Sweden’s relations with other states or intergovernmental organizations.
– My assessment is that this is not the case, for those acts, intent is required and there is a justifiability requirement that can make reporting about possible irregularities justifiable and you should be able to rely on that, says Johan Pehrson.
That image is not shared by Anders Kompass, former head of field work at the UN Office for Human Rights in Geneva.
He revealed that the UN tried to hush up a report about the sexual abuse of children by UN soldiers in the Central African Republic. Anders Kompass believes this could be punishable under the new legislation.
– Just that this uncertainty exists I think is dangerous. I don’t think there should be such ambiguities and uncertainties about what it’s really about. I was prepared to pay the price within the UN and it would not have been more horrible than being dismissed. But if it’s about getting a prison sentence as well, I think that shouldn’t happen in Sweden, Kompass told Aftonbladet earlier.
S and L vote for
According to Johan Pehrson, the Liberals wanted clarification in the legislation, which was the reason why they withheld their votes in April.
Now you have no choice but to vote yes, he says.
– Well, we argued our entire motion because we are in favor of this legislation and because we wanted a different wording, but now we didn’t get it. Then we stand here with this wording, or none at all. Swedish life and Swedish democracy must be protected and that is what we are doing now, he says.
Magdalena Andersson also states on Wednesday morning that the Social Democrats intend to vote yes for the law when the Riksdag is to vote at 4 p.m.
Facts
This is how the parties respond
Why do you vote yes to the Foreign Espionage Act?
– The moderates will vote for the bill. Sweden has had weaker legislation than other countries. The purpose of the amendment to the law is to provide stronger protection for Sweden’s security. There are gaps in the law that need to be closed, and this is done through amendments to the constitution.
Do you see any risks with the proposal?
– There are always risks when restrictions are to be made in a constitution to enable tougher legislation. It is good that the issue is being debated and the debate has also been influenced by the legislative work. For example, clarifications have been made in the rule that protects everyone except spies, so the risks are assessed as very small from the risks that are raised. A journalist who exposes wrongdoing within, for example, international efforts is not covered by the change in the law, there is an express exception from criminal liability.
The Social Democrats
Why do you vote yes to the Foreign Espionage Act?
– What we are doing now is to plug a hole in the espionage provision, as it is designed today. It is entirely reasonable that we get legislation in place that does not allow, for example, the disclosure of secret information regarding the security of the kingdom, to foreign powers or terrorist organizations. It is also important that, within international peace and security-promoting collaborations, we can protect secret information in a similar way as our Nordic neighboring countries do.
Do you see any risks with the proposal?
– Careful consideration is always required regarding changes in the law that affect freedom of the press and freedom of expression. However, our assessment is that investigative journalism, for example, clearly falls outside what is punishable.
The Christian Democrats
No answer
The Sweden Democrats
No answer
The Liberals
No answer
The Green Party
– The number of international collaborations in which Sweden participates has increased many-fold since work on this bill began. Therefore, there is every reason in the world to take another turn to ensure that we, but also the media and civil society, can feel safe that this is good legislation, says Jan Riise, MP’s KU member.
Read more