The riots began on April 14 when a Danish politician with Swedish citizenship, named Radmus Paludan, was supposed to start a multi-city tour in Sweden to perform acts of burning a copy of the Koran within predominantly Muslim neighborhoods all over the country. His party was founded in Denmark in 2017, is called Stram Kurs, which means 'Hard Line', and got just 1.8% of the vote during the last Danish national election. His plans are also to compete in the Swedish elections and for this he has developed a media strategy based on these acts of provocation. The Swedish police granted this permission to burn the Koran in public spaces arguing that freedom of expression is strongly protected in Sweden and that this case was even endorsed by the European Convention, which regulates the exercise of human rights. Very quickly, violent protests emerged in several cities in central and south of Sweden. The protesters, mostly first- and second-generation Muslim male immigrants, have attempted to assassinate several unarmed police officers, burned numerous police vehicles, mass transit buses and private property. These events are already classified as the most violent protests of this century in Sweden. Both Sweden and the United States have a very similar approach regarding the ban of public events with controversial political expressions. In the United States this is known as the Brandenburg Test and is used to determine if a demonstration is legal or not: 1) If there is incitement to commit acts of violence any time soon. 2) The probability that these acts can be committed is quite high. In the case of Sweden, the police can also refuse to authorize a demonstration if there is a risk that the police will not be able to guarantee the safety of those attending. Moreover, in most Europe what is known as "Hate Speech", that is, all expressions that 'denigrate a social group', is punished. Burning the Koran by Rasmus Paludan is not classified in this way from a legal point of view, since technically he is not inciting to commit acts of corporal violence towards Muslims, or saying hate words towards them, but instead is only 'expressing his discontent with Islam'. Regarding the ability of the police to ensure the physical integrity of the attendees as a sufficient argument for not authorizing these events, the Swedish political class has recently reached a consensus on the importance about "the State regaining control" of areas in Sweden that have a high proportion of immigrant population due to the growing social problems there. To have revoked this permission about holding Paludan's events after the first riots erupted would have directly contravened this political discourse and one of the most sacred rights in the Swedish Constitution. The situation has become increasingly tense and representatives of a significant part of Muslims in Sweden have said that they will never respect this Swedish code of allowing the burning of the Koran, the holy book of Islam. The spread of these events in the Arab countries has been enormous and the Iraqi government has convened the Council of the Swedish Embassy by warning that if these kind of acts do not stop, this will have serious consequences. Until a few years ago, the Swedish police was internationally recognized for its ability to mediate and resolve conflicts, to the point that they hardly have anti-riot equipment and the use of their weapons is extremely limited. However, now the political class has been forced to accept the existance of a new situation and that the violence witnessed in recent days has been unheard of, so some changes are expected in the operation of the police force. Today, almost 30% of the population in Sweden is a first or second generation immigrant and this figure is expected to continue to rise in the coming years, so it is likely that such tensio
ns will become more frecuent.
Comments