Freedom of the press and expression, mass media issues
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M considers freedom of expression to be fundamental and that the state must not hinder expressions 1. M advocates for stronger criminal law protection for journalists and persons in socially important functions 1. S emphasizes the importance of a unified strategy against hate and threats against journalists 2 and wants a parliamentary inquiry into future media support 2. KD highlights the importance of protecting journalists and civil society against hate and violence 3. L emphasizes the media's role as the third estate 4, advocates for reinforced criminal law protection for journalists and public employees 4, welcomes new media support legislation 4 and wants to balance the principle of public access against personal privacy 4. C considers that journalists need strengthened protection 5, wants to give the Crime Prevention Council a clearer mandate 5, ensure independent news coverage 5 and advocates for public support for security measures in newsrooms 5. MP proposes whistleblower protection for employees in state-owned companies and outsourced companies 6, legislation to limit the searchability of sensitive search services 6, increased media support for news media across the country 6, an inquiry into support for magazines 6 as well as exemptions from value-added tax for newspapers 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Susanne Nordström (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin by saying that freedom of expression is fundamental to our society. All our civil and political rights rest upon it. A society filled with people's fear of speaking out or writing their heart's content or opinion is completely unthinkable for us.
I thought of the little boy in former East Germany who, in a school essay, directed stinging criticism at the East German car brand Trabant - the East Germans' people's car. For a new Trabant, one had to pay 20,000 marks. The boy wrote: It is simply outrageous to demand such an overprice for such a bad, primitive and ugly car. He added that even the smallest and simplest model of the West German brand Volkswagen Polo was both more beautiful and more comfortable than any of the car brands from East Germany.
When the student's master read these words, he realized that it concerned state-hostile activity and therefore handed over the boy's essay to the principal. The principal, in his capacity as school head, took his social responsibility and forwarded the essay to the security police Stasi for review. It became a police matter, and the boy and his parents were placed under surveillance and called in for questioning.
This thesis is available to be read in its entirety at a museum in Leipzig.
I can take a more immediate example. On Sunday, I read in the newspaper about a sixth-grade class in a school in Yefremov, about 30 miles south of Moscow. They had an art lesson and were supposed to paint drawings in support of the Russian military. Twelve-year-old Masya painted a woman and a child next to a Ukrainian flag. On the flag, it says: Long live Ukraine. And the woman in the drawing holds up a hand against projectiles being fired at them from a Russian flag. On that flag, it says: No to war.
Freedom of the press and freedom of expression, mass media issues
The police were called to the school, and the social services conducted home visits. Now, almost a year later, a legal case is ongoing where the father could lose custody of his little daughter.
Madam Speaker! These events are, of course, very stomach-turning in a Swedish context – I suppose everyone understands that. My point, however, is that one should not have to wonder whether one is allowed to say, write, or utter something, as this is regulated in our constitution. Freedom of expression means that the state may not prevent your expression. This also means that one has no obligation to listen, for example, to what I say. If someone tries to prevent your expression with violence, the state has an obligation to defend your right to express yourself.
George Orwell is said to have said: Freedom of speech gives me the right to say what you do not want to hear. But he said it in English and not in Östgötska.
It is heartening to read motions linked to this report and see that there are several of us who want to improve. Investigation and preparatory work is ongoing, and in that way, some of the motions' objectives are being addressed.
The investigation, which I mentioned in my previous debate contribution, on an enhanced criminal protection for certain socially useful functions and some other criminal law issues makes, among other things, the assessment that a stronger criminal protection is needed for those who professionally conduct news reporting or other journalism and proposes that a special ground for increased penalties be introduced in the Penal Code.
Madam Speaker! On March 9, 2023, the Government decided on a referral to the Council on Legislation titled "Stricter view on crimes against journalists and certain other socially useful functions".
It concerns crimes committed against a person because of their journalistic practice or, for that matter, against a person who, in their work, performs a socially important function, for example, an employee in the social services. He or she should be able to perform their important work without being afraid of threats or violence. With this tightening, the employees will have better opportunities to, for example, focus on the work of supporting and protecting children and other vulnerable people.
It can also apply to those who, in their profession, cannot choose to avoid contacts with people and who are subjected to hate or threats. One cannot address the issue through work environment measures. It is also difficult to prevent. This makes it also justified to have a strengthened criminal law protection for educational staff within the school system.
What I have just described is not only a crime against those who perform their work but also against our democracy and against our society.
These legislative changes are proposed to enter into force on 1 August 2023.
I would also like to say a few words about hate crimes and other crimes that threaten our democracy.
The Swedish Police Authority shall continue to develop and improve the work of combating hate crimes and other crimes that threaten democracy. That is the mission the authority has received, and it has been partially reported in March 2022 and now in March 2023. And it shall be finaly reported in December 2023.
We have heard other speakers here talk about the digitized society we live in and about the occurrence of hate, threats, and online harassment. In 2021, one in ten upper secondary school students had been subjected to online hate and harassment.
Even the infrastructure of Swedish society has become more vulnerable. The occurrence of, for example, cybercrime, such as attacks against the websites of both authorities and municipalities, appears to be increasing. And in workplaces, there has been an increase in attempts of influence and crimes of influence against civil servants in public activities, elected officials, journalists and opinion leaders, but also against other professional groups, such as researchers.
Madam Speaker! Despite occurring abuses, it is difficult to make restrictions on constitutionally guaranteed rights in order to rectify deviations in our society. Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of our entire social structure, and it must be protected both in principle and in practice.
Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of the committee's proposal in its entirety.
Peter Hedberg (S)
Madam Speaker! We are now considering the Committee on the Constitution's report 27 on freedom of the press and freedom of expression and mass media issues.
As a previous speaker has pointed out, it is an exciting time to discuss these issues because particularly freedom of expression and the media world are under various forms of pressure.
Madam Speaker! A week or two ago, Tidningsutgivarna emailed us Members of Parliament ahead of Press Freedom Day on May 3. In the email, we were asked to answer the question: Why is press freedom important? The answer is perhaps obvious for many, but it was a challenge for us because we were to keep it very short. If I remember correctly, it concerned two sentences and a maximum of 200 characters. For many elected politicians, it is a huge challenge to limit themselves that much.
I chose to answer the following: "Freedom of the press enables reporting on and scrutiny of the decisions and actions of those in power. As an elected representative, I see it as crucial for democracy and well-informed citizens."
It may not be the case that as an elected representative, one is always completely satisfied with the scrutiny and reporting found in the media. But that is not the purpose and point of freedom of the press. The purpose is instead what I answered: to enable citizens to access important information about the decisions and actions of those in power. This applies both nationally, regionally, and locally.
That is why we as politicians must act when free press and journalists are subjected to attacks that threaten democracy, and this applies both in our own country and in the rest of the world.
Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats have therefore, in a reservation, emphasized the importance of a new, unified strategy to counter hate and threats against journalists.
A number of measures and assignments regarding this are underway that are positive, including a referral to the Council on Legislation regarding strengthening the criminal law protection for journalists. It also concerns various forms of assignments to the police and the Crime Victim Authority and some research, for example at Linnaeus University.
From today's situation, the Social Democrats nevertheless argue that it is important that the government acts united and coordinates this work within the framework of a new and united strategy.
Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats also have a reservation, together with the Left Party and the Green Party, concerning the searchability of certain personal data. This concerns data linked to, for example, the criminal record and involuntary psychiatric care. These are serious infringements on individuals' personal privacy that must be addressed.
Last in November, the issue was debated in the chamber, and at that time, the criticism that the EU has directed at Sweden in this matter was also raised. There were then differences of opinion on how a legislative regulation could be formulated, but I still perceived a consensus on the dignity of the matter. We naturally hope that the government will return with a legislative proposal in the matter.
We also have a reservation linked to the media support. We would like to see a parliamentary inquiry into the future of media support. A media support inquiry has been submitted, which we Social Democrats consider to have well-balanced proposals. But given that the media landscape is changing so rapidly, it is also important that a parliamentary inquiry looks at this in the long term.
Gudrun Brunegård (KD)
Madam Speaker! Voltaire has been credited with this phrase: I disapprove of what you say, but I am willing to give my life for your right to say it. In fact, it was his biographer, Evelyn Beatrice Hall, who formulated the phrase as a summary of Voltaire's view.
Our Swedish democracy is worth both celebrating and protecting. It is built on free formation of opinion. The Freedom of Expression Act and the Freedom of the Press Act regulate the right and the protection for each individual to freely express their thoughts, opinions, and feelings. Corresponding freedom exists to express oneself in radio, TV, or similar transmissions, public playbacks from a database, films, videograms, audio recordings, and other technical recordings. A particularly strong protection exists for printed writings and certain other forms of media. The principles of prohibition of censorship, freedom of establishment, sole responsibility, protection of the sender, a specific catalogue of crimes, and a specific judicial procedure prevail within this area.
It is, however, punishable as unlawful threats, harassment, molestation, defamation or insult. Anyone who intrudes into someone's private life through the dissemination of certain types of images or other information can be convicted of unlawful privacy infringement according to the Penal Code if the dissemination is intended to cause serious harm to the person the image or information concerns.
Thus, it is associated with high penalty values to commit unlawful coercion or unlawful threats with the intent to influence public opinion or infringe upon the freedom of action within a political organization or a professional or business association and thereby endanger the freedom of expression, assembly, or association. An aggravating circumstance is if the crime is committed against a person, or their close relative, who has or has had a mandate as an elected official in the state, municipality, region, the Sami Parliament, or the European Parliament. This applies, in particular, to us members of the Riksdag.
To protect freedom of opinion and freedom of association, there are state grants to increase the security of civil society organizations whose activities are affected by fear of threats, violence, and harassment. One such example is Jewish synagogues.
Madam Speaker! Attacks against journalists are a serious problem. As recently as March 9, the government decided on the referral to the Council on Legislation, *Skärpt syn på brott mot journalister och vissa andra samhällsnyttiga funktioner* (Stricter view on crimes against journalists and certain other socially useful functions). In that, the government proposes a specific basis for increased penalties for crimes committed against a person or their close relatives due to professional news reporting or other journalism.
The Swedish Police Authority has a special mission to improve the work to combat hate crimes and other threats against democracy. This includes, among other things, structured dialogue with groups that are subjected to hate crimes and other crimes that threaten democracy.
The Crime Victim Authority has presented proposals on how an information campaign could be carried out, for example for persons who have been subjected to online hate due to racism, gender-related hate, sexism and the like.
For me, who is elected for Kalmar län, it is particularly interesting to read about Linnéuniversitetet's assignment with the working title Demokratijouren. It involves identifying, developing, and implementing competence and capacity-building measures for journalists and newsrooms to prevent and manage vulnerability to threats and hate. This is carried out by the media institute Fojo, which provides continuing education for journalists and belongs to Linnéuniversitetet.
Active journalists and media managers can seek advice and knowledge there on how to handle hate and threats. Fojo also has a manned helpdesk where vulnerable journalists and editorial leaders can seek advice and support. They also conduct a highly appreciated continuing education activity for journalists, not least from repressive environments where it can be life-threatening to practice free and independent journalism. This is completely indispensable in countries where one can be classified as a terrorist simply by factually reporting on abuses of justice committed by an authoritarian regime.
This is also a serious reminder of how important it is to protect and safeguard the freedom of expression and freedom of the press that we here in Sweden all too often take for granted.
Malin Danielsson (L)
Madam Speaker! It is for good reasons that the media has been referred to as the third estate of the realm since the mid-1800s. The importance of investigative journalism cannot be overemphasized; the early newspapers, for example, played an entirely decisive role in the development of democracy in Sweden. For a long time, the media has scrutinized those in power, highlighted individuals who have fallen through the cracks, and revealed how companies, for example, have cheated with their environmental work. The media needs good conditions to continue with this.
But there are those who want to restrict freedom of expression and freedom of the press. It concerns people who express hatred and threats against our elected representatives or against journalists and who try to hinder free speech. It is up to us to ensure that freedom of the press and freedom of expression are upheld and protected and that a diversity of media can operate freely.
As part of the defense of freedom of the press and freedom of expression, there is a responsibility to prevent and deter threats, harassment, and violence directed by both individuals and groups against journalists and also public employees. A few weeks ago, a referral to the Council on Legislation was decided in which a strengthening of the criminal protection for both these groups is proposed. Crimes committed against a person because they have engaged in journalism or against a person with a socially useful function in their professional duties are an attack not only against the person subjected to the crime but, in the long run, also against democracy and society as such. The seriousness of such a violation should, of course, be reflected in the penalty, which is now proposed. Even within the EU, work is underway to strengthen the protection for journalists and newsrooms, which is very welcome.
Madam Speaker! In order to maintain a free and vibrant journalism across the entire country, we also need to safeguard the media ecosystem. If the daily newspapers and local news journalism are to survive, they will need support even in the future. This applies particularly in light of the challenge that digitalization entails. A new media support legislation is underway and meets many of the challenges that the media face, which we welcome.
Madam Speaker! Finally, I would like to specifically highlight a part of the committee's position regarding the voluntary constitutional protection for databases. Already when this was introduced, the committee warned that conflicts could arise between the protection of personal privacy and that, in the worst case, the constitutional protection could encompass databases that are pure personal registers. The committee has also emphasized that search services that provide personal data on law violations etc. constitute a serious infringement on the individual's personal privacy. It is important that the scope of the constitutional laws is clearly defined.
Unfortunately, the development has gone in the direction that the committee feared. The committee considers that there is a need for changes to the current rules in order to achieve a purposeful protection against privacy violations and assumes that the government will continue to work on the issue with the aim of returning with necessary changes. This is important.
Personal privacy, not least online, is a constantly relevant issue. Digital development means that what one previously had to contact an authority about and have a relatively cumbersome process for, is now available with a simple search on the internet. And furthermore, you sometimes get access to information that you have not even requested. It can be personal data that you did not know you wanted or even want.
Just as I have pointed out in a previous speech here today, surveys show that a third of Swedes are concerned about how companies use personal data and that half refrain from digital services because they are unsure of how the personal data is used. This applies, of course, also to the voluntarily constitutionally protected databases.
Here we have a great responsibility to find a better balance between, on the one hand, the principle of public access and freedom of expression and, on the other hand, the right to privacy and personal integrity, not least when it concerns the voluntarily constitutionally protected databases.
Malin Björk (C)
Madam Speaker! I would first like to move for approval of reservation 2.
A free press is a prerequisite for a vital democracy. Historically, we can see that a society where a free press has flourished has led to increased influence for all citizens, not just those with economic or political power. It has also led to greater opportunities to hold those in power accountable for their actions—in contrast to what can be witnessed in an authoritarian society, where the possession of power is the overriding goal. In such states, the regime often ensures that the scrutinizers of power are silenced through harassment or through more or less open threats.
Independent journalists as well as scrutinizers of power are among the first victims of a regime that is moving towards authoritarian rule. Many are the names that could be mentioned here, people who have guarded the free word and who have sacrificed their freedom, sometimes even risked their lives, because they have stood up for this freedom of expression. But my speaking time does not allow me to highlight more than a couple of them.
One of the brave people I listened to last week at the Swedish Academy's full-day seminar on democracy and freedom of speech was Yirgalem Fisseha Mebrahtu from Eritrea, a woman who has been imprisoned for six years in Eritrea, without prior legal proceedings, by an authoritarian regime that wanted to silence her when she stood up for the free word.
Another woman and journalist who was passionate about freedom of speech was Anna Politkovskaja. She was an early voice warning against Vladimir Putin and his authoritarian methods and claims. After she had received several serious threats, she was found shot to death in her stairwell in central Moscow in October 2006.
Madam Speaker! We do not live in Putin's Russia - thank goodness. But unfortunately, journalists working in Sweden are not immune from harassment and direct threats either. Several of my colleagues in the Committee on the Constitution have touched upon this. The Centre Party considers this to be a group that is extremely important to protect and safeguard so that they can manage to fulfill their important mission. Therefore, we believe that this group needs strengthened protection. We welcome that the government has referred the report presented last spring, in which it is proposed that a special basis for increased penalties be established for crimes directed against journalists in the exercise of their profession.
Centerpartiet also wants to strengthen the capacity of the units within the police that work with democracy issues. We want to give the Crime Prevention Council a clearer mandate to educate and support employers, trade unions, and individuals working within the media on how they should handle and report threats and harassment. We also want the crime victim helplines to receive increased support for their important work in supporting vulnerable journalists. Furthermore, we want to introduce a public support, similar to that which exists for religious communities, which newsrooms and others can use to invest in security measures, ranging from investments in physical security to security training and IT security. This is particularly important for small companies that lack the resources and knowledge in the area of the large media houses.
Madam Speaker! The press and the media are rightly called the third estate of the realm. They constitute one of the most important institutions in a strong liberal democracy because such a democracy requires media that scrutinize power, inform the citizens, and highlight societal problems. For the third estate of the realm to succeed in its mission fully, it is required that the media are active throughout the entire country, from north to south, from the small municipality in the inland of Norrland to the densely populated inner city of Stockholm.
Centerpartiet takes the white spots in the monitoring that have arisen as a result of closures and cuts within local media, especially in smaller towns, seriously. Adequate measures to ensure access to multifaceted and independent news monitoring and opinion formation throughout the country are absolutely necessary because large and rapid changes continue to occur within the media field, and we must ensure that all citizens, regardless of where in the country they live, have access to multifaceted and independent news monitoring and opinion formation. We must ensure that areas in the country where news monitoring is completely lacking or where there is no daily monitoring receive this.
The media support investigation, which was appointed in the autumn of 2021, submitted its proposal in a memorandum last summer. The proposal has been out for consultation and is currently being prepared in the Government Offices. A government bill is expected by the summer.
Centerpartiet will follow this work closely and see which proposals are put forward and also continue to work for a media policy that enables a viable press throughout the country.
Jan Riise (MP)
Madam Speaker! The KU's report on freedom of the press and freedom of expression and mass media issues covers a rather large area with many different aspects.
To begin with: It is, of course, completely unacceptable that journalists, editorial boards, and other opinion-makers should be subjected to threats and harassment for what they write and say. The committee is entirely in agreement on this. It is, we believe, of great importance to eliminate such problems as threats and harassment because it affects people's opportunities for political engagement. Threats, hate, and violence against elected officials have immediate consequences for the individual but also threaten the democratic system as a whole.
Unfortunately, it is common in Sweden. The Crime Prevention Council reported that every fourth politician was subjected to harassment, threats, or violence during 2020. One in four politicians states that they have been affected in their trust assignment due to vulnerability or fear of being subjected to it, women to a greater extent than men. Threats and hate are also a major obstacle for journalists, the voluntary sector, and individual opinion leaders, who avoid making their voices heard due to the risk of being subjected to it.
A unified strategic effort is needed that combines a strengthened justice system and support for civil society with initiatives on media and information literacy, measures against disinformation, and demands on the global platform companies.
The Action Plan for the Defense of Free Speech should be updated, and in connection with that, the current threat situation against civil society needs to be mapped and concrete measures must be developed to safeguard and expand the democratic space.
Miljöpartiet has asserted in a motion that it is reasonable that all activities financed by tax revenue are subject to the same requirements. Whistleblower protection should therefore also be introduced for employees in state-owned companies and for employees in companies that perform services that have been procured by state agencies.
Madam Speaker! There are databases available via the internet that publish extensive and sensitive personal data about individuals, for example, information regarding presence in criminal records or regarding psychiatric compulsory care. In this way, the websites constitute very serious infringements on individuals' personal privacy and can be used by criminals to map out individuals. The content on the websites in question is protected by the constitution, most often by having a so-called publication certificate for the activity.
The previous government acted to create a better balance between privacy protection and freedom of expression by proposing limitations to the constitutional protection for the most privacy-sensitive search services, but that proposal was stopped in the Riksdag.
We assume that the government acts so that personal integrity can be maintained and therefore want a new piece of legislation to be developed that addresses the problem.
Madam Speaker! A fundamental prerequisite for democracy is that the entire population has good conditions to participate in the public debate and to follow the development of society and politics at local, regional, and national levels. By modernizing and expanding the media support to create better conditions for independent investigative journalism and a diversity of media across the entire country, the countryside and rural areas are also strengthened. I am positive about the Media Support Inquiry's proposal that the starting point for the design of the new media support is that there should be news media in the entire country.
Freedom of the press and freedom of expression, mass media issues
At the same time, it is worrying that media diversity at the national level may lose ground as smaller companies risk facing a tough economic situation. It is therefore important to ensure good support for these media and that there are sufficient funds for the transition to a new system to function.
Furthermore, an investigation should be commissioned as soon as possible with a mandate to review the support for journals. In addition, an exemption from value-added tax for newspapers and journals could be a much-needed complement to the media support.
We have reservations from Miljöpartiet regarding the protection of journalists, the extended whistleblower protection, and the media support. We also have a joint reservation with S and V regarding limiting the searchability of the web services I spoke about.
I move for approval of reservation number 8.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.