SWEDISH LEGAL OBSTACLES TO EXPRESSING REGRET FOR

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 STOCKHOLM 000551

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV PINR PREL SW
SUBJECT: SWEDISH LEGAL OBSTACLES TO EXPRESSING REGRET FOR
AFTONBLADET ARTICLE

Ref: STOCKHOLM 542

Summary
--------------


1. Tensions between ISRAEL and Sweden continue over an August 17
article in Sweden's largest tabloid newspaper, Aftonbladet, which
alleged that Israeli troops harvested organs from Palestinian
prisoners for sale on international markets. Press reports indicate
Israel is asking for the GOS to condemn the article, but Swedish
officials still say they are bound by the Constitution and unable to
make such statements without serious repercussions. An opposition
MP has filed a complaint with Parliament's Committee on the
Constitution, arguing that the Swedish ambassador to Israel's
apologetic statement constituted "interference" with the
Constitution. Senior GOS officials have noted the 2006 forced
resignation of a former foreign minister, who was seen as having
violated the Freedom of the Press Act when she tried to close a
website hosting cartoons of Mohammed. Separately, on August 23 a
complaint was filed against Aftonbladet for inciting racial
agitation. Comment: GOS interlocutors have told us that any
expression of regret will be difficult while Israeli FM Lieberman
tells the press that Swedish lack of response now is similar to
Swedish silence during the Holocaust. There are also legal
obstacles in Sweden to perceived governmental interference with the
press. End Comment and Summary.

Why Swedish Officials Will Not Apologize
--------------


2. The Swedish Cabinet has so far declined to condemn the August 17
article, referring to the Freedom of the Press Act and the
Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression enshrined in the
Constitution. Swedish Chancellor of Justice Goran Lambertz, a
special prosecutor who has the sole authority to investigate press
freedom issues, commented to SvT Television on August 25 that in the
past, ministers have had to resign for violating these laws. (Note:
In March 2006, the Social Democratic Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Laila Freivalds, was pressured to resign from her office after her
involvement in the closing of a website belonging to the far-right
Sweden Democrats, which in the wake of the Danish Jyllands-Posten
Mohammed cartoons controversy was hosting an online competition for
the best Mohammed cartoon. She was never convicted of violating the
law, but the political pressure--solely for being suspected of
violating The Freedom of the Press Act--forced her to resign.)
Aftonbladet reported to Chancellor of Justice
--------------

3. On August 23, a complaint against Aftonbladet was filed by an
unknown party to Chancellor of Justice Lambertz. The Chancellor
will decide whether the article constitutes racial agitation. Nils
Funcke, a leading Swedish expert on legislation pertaining to
freedom of speech, said he expected the case to be rejected. "The
article can hardly be construed as racial agitation. There is no
ethnic group targeted; the article focuses on the Israeli army, and
Israel is not made up solely of Jews," Funcke told the press. He
added that charges set forth by Israeli politicians that
Aftonbladet's article followed in a long tradition of "blood libels"
against Jews would "not hold up" under legal scrutiny.

4. Separately, Lambertz yesterday told the press that government
could go much further in its criticism of the article without
contravening the constitution: "The government has considerable
leeway in such matters. A minister can without risk say something
along the lines of 'We have no reason to believe these allegations',
but [he or she] would be contravening the constitution if he or she
actually criticized the decision to publish the article." He went
on to say, "It is not totally clear where the line is drawn. One
can do quite a lot according to the Constitution, but it would still
be seen as politically and judicially improper behavior. That was
the case with the Mohammed cartoon and Freivalds' actions. There
was no doubt that it was legal, but it was considered to be
inappropriate by the Committee on the Constitution."
Opposition Files Complaint "to Safeguard Constitution"
-------------- --------------

5. Opposition MP and Social Democratic Foreign Affairs Spokesperson
Urban Ahlin filed a complaint regarding the government's actions to
the Parliamentary Committee on the Constitution. According to
Ahlin, the apologetic statement published by the Swedish Ambassador
to ISRAEL on her embassy's website (reftel) was "an interference"
with the Swedish Constitution's Freedom of the Press Act's
prohibition for censorship and Freedom of Expression. "It is not
the government's task to state what is suitable to publish. This
right is with the responsible publisher, and no one else," said
Ahlin. The case will be reviewed by the Committee sometime in
spring 2010 and the MFA cannot comment on issues during the
investigation. Separately, press reports indicate the ambassador
will also be investigated by the Ministry of Justice Ombudsman and
the Chancellor for Justice as well.

Comment
--------------

6. Swedish interlocutors have told us that any expression of regret

STOCKHOLM 00000551 002 OF 002


will be difficult as long as Israeli FM Lieberman continues to
comment to the press that Swedish lack of response now is similar to
Swedish silence during the Holocaust. In addition, there are legal
and political obstacles in Sweden to perceived governmental
interference with the press.
BARZUN