[ad_1]
Politician SD: It is a fact, not a political opinion
Published:
This is a discussion article. The author is responsible for the opinions expressed in the text, not Aftonbladet.
Photo: TT
We believe that the criticism of the king is unjustified. That Sweden has been unable to cope with the crown pandemic is an established fact, both nationally and internationally, write four SD politicians in the constitutional committee. (File photo)
DEBATE. In SVT’s “The Year with the Royal Family,” the king looks back at 2020 and describes it as a terrible year. To a question about what the king considers most stressful about the pandemic, the answer is:
“I think we have failed. We have many who have died and that is terrible. It is something that we all suffer,” he says on the program.
Criticisms of the statement were immediate and come from both public administration professors and the media in particular. They believe the statement can be interpreted as political because it is alleged to indicate that the failure is the government’s fault.
The role of the monarch according to the form of government is essentially ceremonial. The monarch is not expected to speak on politically sensitive issues or an opposing relationship between the king and the government and the Riksdag appears to prevail. More detailed restrictions on what the head of state “should not do” it is in the preparatory work and is not explicitly stipulated in the text of the form of government.
We believe that the criticism of the king is unjustified. Sweden’s failure to deal with the corona pandemic is an established fact, both domestically and internationally.
Sweden has mortality rates 5 to 10 times higher in covid-19 than our Nordic neighbors. The fact that Sweden has not been able to save lives, especially of the elderly, does not even deny the government and belongs to the common image of reality among all, but possibly a few.
In addition, two investigations have been launched during the Riksdag in this regard, one of which came recently with its partial report and where criticism of Sweden’s handling of the pandemic was unexpectedly harsh.
The fact that the king also does not designate an individual party, but says “we”, which should reasonably be interpreted as the nation, makes the criticism even more bizarre.
We believe that in this case there is no contradiction between the king’s statement in SVT and the vision of the government and the Riksdag on the nation’s problems to combat the worst pandemic in human memory.
There is simply no difference of opinion regarding this, that Sweden has a very high excess mortality rate in covid-19. However, there are different opinions on why this is due, from the decommissioning of contingency stocks to insufficient legislation.
But we all agree that the country has failed to save lives during the crown pandemic and that expressing this common picture of reality is not a political stance that would go against the intentions of our constitution, whether this is done. detach from the form of government or its preparatory work.
Matheus Enholm, member of the Constitutional Committee (SD)
Mikael Strandman, member of the Constitutional Committee (SD)
Fredrik Lindahl, member of the Constitutional Committee (SD)
According to Söderlund, deputy constitutional working committee (SD)
Join the debate and comment on the article.
– like Aftonbladet Debatt on Facebook.
Published:
