The fact that police have explicitly permitted individuals to burn Qur’anic copies in public on numerous occasions in the recent past may come as a surprise to those outside of Sweden. The events have incited a serious discussion and controversy regarding the extreme right’s misuse of the right to free expression to spread hate in order to advance their political agenda.
Nevertheless, the Swedish government’s issuance of permits for these activities does not necessarily indicate that it endorses or celebrates the message. In contrast, it affirms the fundamental importance of freedom of expression within the national constitution.
To gain a comprehensive understanding of this debate, it is necessary to examine the history of Sweden’s dedication to freedom of expression.
A law that is groundbreaking
In the classroom, Swedish students are introduced to the period of parliamentary history known as “The Age of Liberty,” which occurred from 1719 to 1772. This transition took place from an era of autocratic monarchy to one that was defined by parliamentary authority. Karl XII (Charles XII), the legendary warrior king, was defeated by Russia in Poltava in 1709 and subsequently slain in combat in Norway in 1718. Despite a history of successful military campaigns, this shift was initiated by his death.
Substantial legislative initiatives were implemented during this period, and the significance of freedom of expression in relation to the concept of liberty from tyranny increased. The Freedom of the Press Act of 1766 was the most significant piece of legislation, as it was enacted to promote democracy by protecting the Freedom of Information.
Although amendments have been made since then, the fundamental principles of the document have remained unchanged. These tenets include a “responsible publisher” principal, which entails that the editor-in-chief is entirely responsible for a publication, such as a newspaper, and that whistleblowers are afforded substantial protections. The Freedom of the Press Act was succeeded by the Freedom of Expression Act in 1990.
This broadened the protection of freedom of expression beyond the printed press to include modern forms of expression, including television, radio, and certain digital media (although the latter appears to comprise a restricted number of platforms at present). The media is afforded the most comprehensive protection in the world by these constitutional statutes. Private law was also included in addition to criminal responsibility. For instance, Johnny Depp would not have been able to pursue a legal claim against Amber Heard in Sweden in relation to her newspaper article. She had the freedom to express her thoughts on him in her writing without concern for legal consequences.
In addition to the two statutes that pertain to freedom of expression, Sweden also has the Act on Succession and the government code, both of which are fundamental pieces of legislation. The Swedish constitution is composed of these four fundamental statutes. The governance code is the most significant statute. It includes a chapter on fundamental human rights and liberties that is similar in numerous ways to human rights catalogues in national and international law, such as the European Convention and the United Nations Charter..
The initial rule, which pertains to the protection of freedom of expression, is a notable distinction between human rights catalogues from Sweden and other jurisdictions. This encompasses the freedoms of speech, information, assembly, religion, association, and demonstration, in addition to the freedom of speech and association.
It is important to note that this rule supersedes regulations that protect the rights to life, privacy, or property. Consequently, freedom of expression holds a distinctive position in Swedish legal culture as a preeminent human right. In legal proceedings, it is often assumed that the protection of freedom of expression is more important than other principles or concerns, such as privacy or honor.
This is also evident in the broader context of criminal law. Criminal law, like other legal systems, places numerous restrictions on the freedom of expression. Threatening, defaming, or harassing an individual in any capacity is unlawful. Furthermore, it is unlawful to distribute child pornography, exhibit sexual violence in public, or encourage a mob to assault an individual. Nevertheless, the scope of restrictions is often limited.
The legal framework governing hate speech
Sweden does not have any regulations that specifically address hate speech. In contrast, three provisions are classified as hate speech legislation. A provision of the criminal code specifies that the penalty may be more severe for offenses committed with a hatred motive. The penalty for attempting to torch a mosque on the grounds that it is a mosque is more severe than, for example, the consequences for an individual attempting to torch her school on the grounds that it is her school.
EPA
Unlawful discrimination is prohibited by a second provision of the same code, which is rarely enforced. Although discrimination is indeed penalized, it is typically addressed through the civil law system rather than the criminal law system. The third provision in the category of hate speech is titled “incitement against an ethnic group.”
Incitement against an ethnic group has been the primary focus of the discourse surrounding the burning of the Qur’an in Sweden. It is the sole provision in criminal law that permits the submission of accusations against the individuals involved in such activities. “Incitement against an ethnic group” is a misleading term, as the rule’s true concentration is on derogatory or defamatory remarks directed at a group, rather than “incitement.” In addition to safeguarding ethnic groups, it also safeguards religious communities. The same treatment would be administered to Muslims if they were compared to criminals in reference to the burning of the Qur’an. Nevertheless, the burning of the Qur’an does not comprise an assault on Muslims under the current legal framework.
Rather, it is regarded as an attack on the Islamic faith. These types of assaults are not considered prohibited because they are not directed at a protected group of individuals, but rather at a belief system or an idea. This behavior does not contravene any laws. It is generally presumed that all forms of expression are permissible, given the history of the nation, which has extended over two centuries and is one of the most secular nations in the world, where freedom of expression has been prioritized over all other concerns. Even expressions that are offensive. At present, the Swedish legal system is without any deficiencies. Its nature is as such.
