Ebba Busch – KD on House Dispute: Waiting Time “Not Necessary”

Mona Sahlin (S) was the first major politician to take a break in 1995, after Expressen revealed that she used the state credit card privately. Since then, the term has been used for various suspected criminals who have retired for a shorter or longer period of time.

Such a waiting time is not relevant to KD leader Ebba Busch. The prosecutor has launched a preliminary investigation into suspicions of gross slander, but continues as before, and has a unanimous party board behind her.

KD emphasizes in an email to Expressen on Wednesday how the party unanimously and collectively defends Ebba Busch in the crisis surrounding the house dispute, which has escalated due to the preliminary investigation on criminal suspicion.

Ends unanimously

Party Secretary Peter Kullgren has the following statement on behalf of a unanimous party board: The party board has full confidence in the party leader, Ebba Busch. The party board unanimously considers that a ‘time out’ is not necessary “, is stated in the email from KD press director Sabina Bernhardsson.

Within the party, however, concerns persist about the political consequences. The long-running property dispute with pensioner Esbjörn Bolin has already helped create a trust for Ebba Busch. Suspicion of gross defamation apparently further exacerbates the situation.

– We hope this will be decided quickly, says a source located in the KD center who wishes to remain anonymous.

Waiting for a quick decision

The party naturally hopes that the suspicions will be dismissed quickly and that the preliminary investigation can be closed quickly, so that you are back in the “ordinary” housing dispute. Where a solution may now be closer because the parties are obviously considering tenders, according to the source.

– We don’t have many previous examples where political leaders have ended up in a private conflict that gets so much attention. Therefore, there is no practice on how to act, says Andreas Johansson Heinö, political scientist and editor of Timbro.

– In the current situation, I think Ebba Busch will continue as usual. I would be very surprised if he took a break. It makes a difference if it leads to prosecution, he says.

Difference between Sahlin and Busch

He explains that there is a big difference between the Mona Sahlin and Ebba Busch cases: Sahlin mixed the state business with the private one using the state credit card, while Busch has not used his political position.

Frida Park, editor-in-chief of the Christian newspaper Dagen, also believes that the situation will radically change if the preliminary investigation leads to prosecution.

– Certainly, it is serious if a person in a position of trust has shown a lack of judgment such that it leads to a trial for serious defamation. If that were to happen, KD has more to worry about than negative publicity and bad opinion figures, he says and continues:

– Then it is a question of whether she can remain as party leader. And, in case it takes time, if KD has time to solve the problem and find someone else in his place.

Frida Park emphasizes that new information has recently emerged that strengthens public sympathies for Ebba Busch as “a single mother of young children who is struggling to solve the puzzle of her life.”

– It is by no means certain that the preliminary investigation will lead to prosecution. It is important to wait for the message from the prosecutor, he says.

Code of conduct with high requirements

According to the Riksdag’s code of conduct, members of the Riksdag must “Follow the laws they make”. The code emphasizes that it is configured “High ethical and moral demands” with the members.

“These requirements include refraining from what may be legal, both in private and on assignment, but may be deemed unethical or inappropriate by others.” it says in the code.

Riksdag President Andreas Norlén does not want to comment on whether the code of conduct is applicable in the case of Ebba Busch.

It is generally seen as a guide for individual members of parliament, and it is usually their party groups that decide if someone’s actions violate the code.