ECI: No legal excuse for Bildt to refrain from criticizing Boström’s organ-story

When Norwegian Dagbladet finally picked up on the Donald Boström blood-libel story, they headed their article “May Israeli soldiers have stolen Palestinian organs?”

Press release from ECI:

No legal excuse for Swedish Foreign Minister Bildt to refrain from criticizing blood libel article in Aftonbladet

Stockholm, 12 November, 2009 – “There were no constitutional restraints for Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt to comment or criticize the publication of the article in Aftonbladet in August that suggested that Israeli soldiers were trafficking human organs from Palestinians. When the article appeared in the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet on 17 August, Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt refused to distance himself from the text by explaining that “any comment from his side may be in contradiction with the Swedish constitution which forbids government leaders from interfering with freedom of the press.”

But Swedish Chancellor of Justice Göran Lambertz clearly rejected this interpretation of the Swedish constitution as he spoke at a symposium in the Swedish parliament yesterday.

“- Nothing is stopping a government minister from criticizing an article which may be of general interest as long as he or she is criticizing the article based on facts and not trying to put any pressure on the editor which published the text. It would have been in conflict with the Swedish constitution to try to stop the publishing of the article or even to give a reprimand afterwards but not to discuss it openly and even clearly distance oneself from it,” stated Lambertz on Wednesday in Stockholm.

This was the main message of the Chancellor of Justice as he spoke at the seminar which was attended by interested members of parliament and by Swedish media. The announcement from the Chancellor of Justice was in clear contrast with the line of defense from government representative Olof Ehrenkrona who insisted that “the government had acted within the constitutional framework and in line with a previous decision concerning the publications of the Mohammed cartoons.”

“- Then and now our message is the same, freedom of speech is non-negotiable for the Swedish government, regardless of which other government is involved,” he said. But many participants of the symposium objected, saying that acting within the law is not the same as acting morally right.
“– The officials of the British mandate who prevented Jews from fleeing the Holocaust and entering Israel also acted within the legal framework but it was still wrong,” said one participant. Many participants asked for a more active stand from the Swedish government to stand up against the rise of anti-Semitism in Sweden and in Europe.

The symposium had been called together by the Swedish parliamentary friendship group with Israel under the leadership of MP Elisabeth Svantesson and MP Mikael Oscarsson and was initiated by the European Coalition for Israel.

In his speech, which was published in the Jerusalem Post yesterday, ECI director Tomas Sandell stated that the situation in Sweden today is very different from the ethos of the International Holocaust Forum which took place in Stockholm only ten years ago.

“- The article in Aftonbladet is only the top of an iceberg when it comes to latent anti-Semitism in Sweden,” he said. During 2009 there have been many similar incidents. Only last week it was announced that the first openly anti-Zionist party will soon be launched in Sweden and that anyone, also Nazis, are welcome to join.

“- This is what makes us worried and this is what prompted us to contact the Swedish foreign minister to ask for an emergency summit when the Aftonbladet story broke in August,” he said. “But there was no reaction from the Swedish government and hence we are today meeting in the Swedish parliament to discuss the lack of reaction of the government.” In his speech he pointed out that “whenever the EU has faced similar controversies in the past their political institutions, including the EU-presidency, have acted swiftly to distance themselves from any expression of anti-Semitism and called together the stakeholders to calm the situation.”

“- The Swedish government, which holds the current EU-presidency, chose silence and to hide behind an incorrect interpretation of the constitution. We now expect new pro-active measures from the Swedish government to convince us that they take the rise of anti-Semitism and racism in Sweden and in Europe seriously, thus proving that they want to stay true to the legacy of the First Stockholm Holocaust Forum of the year 2000.”