Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK

POLITICS

Åkesson interview wasn’t unfair: TV watchdog

Sweden's broadcasting regulator has rejected complaints that the country's top TV chat show host was guilty of bias in a controversial interview with Sweden Democrat leader Jimmie Åkesson in March.

Published: 8 June 2015 17:42 CEST
Åkesson interview wasn't unfair: TV watchdog
Jimmie Åkesson during the controversial interview. Photo: TT

The scrutiny committee for Sweden’s authority for radio and TV on Monday said that it did not think that the interview with the politician was contrary to the requirements for objectivity and impartiality, SVT reported.

Broadcast on March 27th on Swedish public broadcaster SVT, the interview with the nationalist leader resulted in hundreds of complaints both in Sweden and across the border in Norway, where the programme was also broadcast.

In Sweden complaints started coming in even before the interview was aired, with many criticizing the broadcaster on social media for giving the controversial far-right leader a forum on Norwegian journalist Fredrik Skavlan’s popular show.

But once the programme had been broadcast, most viewers focussed on how the interview was conducted, arguing that Åkesson, who went on sick leave last October, had been treated too harshly by Skavlan.

During the interview Skavlan repeatedly asked Åkesson about controversial, and often racist, statements made in the past by Sweden Democrats.

A blogger for Sweden's GP newspaper titled his entry on the interview: “Skavlan was a pitbull”.

The interview also touched upon the fact that the nationalist leader had been on sick leave since October 2014 and is still on anti-depressants.

“There's obviously a reason why others don't choose to talk about this. It's because you're scared, as a political leader, to be perceived as weak. 'How are you supposed to return to your party leader job now, you who are taking antidepressants? You, who are so weak, how are you going to manage?',” Åkesson told Skavlan.

“But I think that for the sake of both the voters and myself, I have to be open about this,” he added.

Other viewers praised the broadcaster for this approach, arguing that Jimmie Åkesson needed to be grilled for his far-right views.

Speaking at the time, SVT argued that it had a role to “comment on and question the world”.

Defending its decision on Monday, the broadcasting authority said: “A host must have a critical perspective and ask questions of provocative character in order to clarify the position of the person being interviewed.” 

The Sweden Democrats are the third largest party in Sweden, after scoring 12.9 percent of the vote in the country's last general election in September 2014.

For members

POLITICS

‘Very little debate’ on consequences of Sweden’s crime and migration clampdown

Sweden’s political leaders are putting the population’s well-being at risk by moving the country in a more authoritarian direction, according to a recent report.

Published: 29 April 2024 08:56 CEST
'Very little debate' on consequences of Sweden's crime and migration clampdown

The Liberties Rule of Law report shows Sweden backsliding across more areas than any other of the 19 European Union member states monitored, fuelling concerns that the country risks breaching its international human rights obligations, the report says.

“We’ve seen this regression in other countries for a number of years, such as Poland and Hungary, but now we see it also in countries like Sweden,” says John Stauffer, legal director of the human rights organisation Civil Rights Defenders, which co-authored the Swedish section of the report.

The report, compiled by independent civil liberties groups, examines six common challenges facing European Union member states.

Sweden is shown to be regressing in five of these areas: the justice system, media environment, checks and balances, enabling framework for civil society and systemic human rights issues.

The only area where Sweden has not regressed since 2022 is in its anti-corruption framework, where there has been no movement in either a positive or negative direction.

Source: Liberties Rule of Law report

As politicians scramble to combat an escalation in gang crime, laws are being rushed through with too little consideration for basic rights, according to Civil Rights Defenders.

Stauffer cites Sweden’s new stop-and-search zones as a case in point. From April 25th, police in Sweden can temporarily declare any area a “security zone” if there is deemed to be a risk of shootings or explosive attacks stemming from gang conflicts.

Once an area has received this designation, police will be able to search people and cars in the area without any concrete suspicion.

“This is definitely a piece of legislation where we see that it’s problematic from a human rights perspective,” says Stauffer, adding that it “will result in ethnic profiling and discrimination”.

Civil Rights Defenders sought to prevent the new law and will try to challenge it in the courts once it comes into force, Stauffer tells The Local in an interview for the Sweden in Focus Extra podcast. 

He also notes that victims of racial discrimination at the hands of the Swedish authorities had very little chance of getting a fair hearing as actions by the police or judiciary are “not even covered by the Discrimination Act”.

READ ALSO: ‘Civil rights groups in Sweden can fight this government’s repressive proposals’

Stauffer also expresses concerns that an ongoing migration clampdown risks splitting Sweden into a sort of A and B team, where “the government limits access to rights based on your legal basis for being in the country”.

The report says the government’s migration policies take a “divisive ‘us vs them’ approach, which threatens to increase rather than reduce existing social inequalities and exclude certain groups from becoming part of society”.

Proposals such as the introduction of a requirement for civil servants to report undocumented migrants to the authorities would increase societal mistrust and ultimately weaken the rule of law in Sweden, the report says.

The lack of opposition to the kind of surveillance measures that might previously have sparked an outcry is a major concern, says Stauffer.

Politicians’ consistent depiction of Sweden as a country in crisis “affects the public and creates support for these harsh measures”, says Stauffer. “And there is very little talk and debate about the negative consequences.”

Hear John Stauffer from Civil Rights Defender discuss the Liberties Rule of Law report in the The Local’s Sweden in Focus Extra podcast for Membership+ subscribers.

SHOW COMMENTS