The inquiry comes after Sweden’s appeals court ruled in June that police had been wrong to deny permission for two Quran-burning protests in February on the grounds that they represented a broader security risk. The court ruled that the Public Order Act as it stands only empowers the police to take into account risks to public safety in the immediate area where an event is taking place. 

This left police powerless to stop a succession of Quran-burning protests in June and July, which led to condemnation from Muslim countries around the world, the storming of Sweden’s embassy in Iraq, and calls from at least five militant Islamic groups for terror reprisals. 

“We are taking responsibility in a difficult situation,” Sweden’s justice minister, Gunnar Strömmer, said at a press conference.  

The government has appointed Matthias Larsson, the Director General of the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, to chair the inquiry, which is titled “Increased protection for Sweden’s security at public gatherings”. 

According to the “committee directive“, Larsson should by July 2024 propose changes to the law which will allow that “circumstances which threaten Sweden’s security can be taken into account in the process of deciding on permissions for public gatherings, and in weighing up whether to cancel or break up public gatherings”. 

He will work together on these proposals with a committee of MPs from both government and opposition parties.

Jimmie Åkesson, leader of the far-right Sweden Democrats party, criticised the government for bending in the face of international pressure over the Quran burnings.  

“Even if different values always need to be weighed against each other, the Sweden Democrats are never going to accept that we adjust our behaviour in the face of threats and pressure from Islamists and dictators,” he said in written comment. 

In a joint article in the Dagens Nyheter newspaper, Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, and Ebba Busch and Johan Pehrson, the leaders of Sweden’s two other coalition parties, stressed that the government had not yet decided that police should gain new grounds to stop public gatherings.  

“This is about strengthening Sweden’s legislative readiness against various types of serious threat against Swedes and Swedish interests,” they wrote. “That’s to say, that we are now making sure that there is legislative work prepared which will allow action to be taken in the future if it is required. And that of course must be considered carefully.”

In the article, they explained that Public Order Act, as framed today only gives the government powers to intervene stop, move or break up gatherings “in the event of war or the risk of war”. 

“This means that there is a hole here between ‘the danger of war’ and public disorder in a specific place and this is a security vulnerability,” they wrote.   

At the press conference, Strömmer said that the government was determined that no changes should be made to any of Sweden’s constitutional laws, and there would be no ban on the desecration of religious texts, or similar additional measures to protect religious sensibilities. 

“There are no plans to bring in some kind of crime against the freedom of religion or any changes to hate laws,” he said. “Our starting point is to make no constitutional changes.”