 | This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations .(June 2020) |
| Part of a series on |
| Censorship by country |
|---|
 |
| Countries |
| See also |
Sweden protects freedom of speech in certain circumstances and was a pioneer in officially abolishing censorship. A number of restrictions remain such as child pornography, hate speech and libel. In all cases there is a legal process afterwards if applicable and no media are censored before publishing.
Sweden was in 1766 the first country to introduce a constitutional law where censorship was abolished and the freedom of the press guaranteed. The Law on the Freedom of Printing of 1766 was written by a committee of the parliament, during the Swedish Age of Liberty (Frihetstiden). This law was also the first in the world to make most documents of the state authorities open and available for the citizens. This principle from 1766 is still an important part of the Swedish Constitution, and all Freedom of Information Acts in the world have grown from an application – usually in a very diluted way – of this Swedish "principle of public availability". The most important founding father of this part of the Swedish constitution was Anders Chydenius, a Finn, who was a member of parliament in the ecclesiastical estate. [1] The freedom of the press is also guaranteed in the Free Press Statute of 1812. [2]
After an interlude between 1772 and 1809, with royal dictatorship and renewed suppression, the freedom of the press was reintroduced by the parliament in the Constitution of 1809–10. The constitutional prohibition against all forms of censorship before publication of books and other printed matters has since 1810 the strict formulation that is still a cornerstone of Sweden's freedom of the press. Not only is a censoring authority illegal, but also all other forms of court injunctions and other measures by the authorities to suppress or restrict a book or a paper before its publication. The injunctions that in many countries are sought by lawyers or officials, and given by the courts, to stop the publication or broadcasting of certain statements, facts or pictures are not possible in Sweden.
During the rule of king Charles XIV John the government had for a number of years power to administratively prohibit the further publication of newspapers. This was relatively easily circumvented by the press by small changes of newspapers' names, and the restrictions were abolished.
After the experiences during World War II (see below) a new Constitutional Law on the Freedom of Printing was decided by parliament in 1949. It gives a detailed constitutional protection of all steps in the production of a book or a newspaper—from the protection of sources to editing and printing through to distribution and reading. This is done by special procedural rules for trials in all cases involving the press, by trial by jury, by the requirement that no judgement of indemnity can be given unless a two-thirds majority of the jury has found the publication criminal – as well as through other rules that make it impossible for the state or for private interests to take legal action against those involved in a book or newspaper's production.
Responsibility before the law rests only on the responsible publisher of a newspaper and only on the author of a book, with secondary rules only for such cases as books with an anonymous or an unknown author. It is not possible to take legal action against reporters, sources, distributors or printers because of the content of a book or a newspaper. The Swedish Constitution in this and a number of other ways gives very strong protection for freedom of speech and the free press. Since 1992, the same level of protection is given to electronic media in a parallel Constitutional Law, although there are exceptions that allow regulation of radio and TV as well as censorship of films shown at cinemas.
Swedish law has a few criminal offences that concern misuse of the printed or spoken word. Among those is a law against hate speech. This is in Sweden seen as a crime against the state and public order, which means that legal action can be taken only by a special prosecutor who is under constitutional obligation to give special consideration to the importance of free speech for a free society. [3]
During World War II pressure from Germany caused the Swedish government to recommend to Swedish publishers not to publish stories Germany might have found biased. Minister of Justice Karl Gustaf Westman revived an old law, long considered obsolete, that made it illegal to publish "offensive writings" about a foreign state. Ture Nerman was sentenced to three months in jail in the winter of 1939 for an anti-Hitler column in his Trots allt! (In spite of it all). Another prominent anti-fascist Israel Holmgren was sentenced to jail by a Swedish court in 1942 for his book Nazisthelvetet (The Nazi Hell). Eventually he was pardoned, and Holmgren decided to publish exactly the same book again, but with a new ironic title, this time called Nazistparadiset (The Nazi Paradise), and he was no longer stopped from publishing it.
Hermann Rauschning's book, The Voice of Destruction, was confiscated two hours after it left the press. [2] These and other cases of suppression showed the need to strengthen the protection of the free press. A committee, with former liberal minister of justice Natanael Gärde as chairman and such well-known journalists and authors as the socialist Rolf Edberg, and the liberals Knut Petersson and Axel Brusewitz among the members, wrote a proposal for a revision of the Constitutional Law on Freedom of Printing. This introduced a far stronger protection of the distribution of news, and it was with a few changes approved by parliament.
Sweden had a film censorship board, Statens biografbyrå , founded in 1911. Statens biografbyrå was closed down in 2011. [4] A new board, Statens medieråd (The Swedish Media Council), have taken over the responsibility of determining the age limits for film. [5] The censorship of film has been removed. [6]
Statens biografbyrå oversaw censorship laws that stated that films "shall not include any material that is offensive to public decency or disrespectful to the authorities or private individuals, nor pictures depicting the commission of murders, robberies or other serious crimes, and exhibitions that are open to children shall not include pictures depicting events or situations that are liable to arouse emotions of terror or horror in the audience or for other reasons be considered unsuitable for children to look at." [7]
All documents about the examination of films, including cut scenes, are available to the public. Some movies have been banned entirely and are not available for viewing. The list of films banned includes Nosferatu (banned for excessive horror), Mad Max and Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation . [8] The last mainstream film to be cut was the 1995 film Casino . [9]
Since the abolition of Statens Biografbyrå, film censorship in Sweden has officially been removed. [6] The new board, Statens medieråd, determines age limits for films. [10] The age limits are 7, 11 or 15 years old. Generally movies where people are killed or assaulted have 15 as the age limit, and movies with acts of sex (even if not shown in detail) have 11 as the age limit. This differs significantly from the practice in the United States of rating films with sex more harshly than films with violence.
It is also illegal to photograph or in any way make a picture of or describe (in writing) and/or publish pictures or documents of military installations and other "protected objects" (skyddsobjekt). The designation of "protected object" can be applied to facilities, geographical areas, ships and aircraft, when in the interest of national security.
The designation of military installations is the responsibility of the Swedish Armed Forces, while for civilian installations – such as critical infrastructure or defense contractor facilities – the responsibility for identification and designation rests with the local County Administrative Board.
Local protection (both civilian and military) has the right to confiscate and/or destroy images, documents and equipment that depicts or is used to depict the protected object/area.
Sweden prohibits hate speech, and defines it as publicly making statements that threaten or express disrespect for an ethnic group or similar group regarding their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, faith or sexual orientation. [11] [12] These regulations are enforced in respect to posts within social media; in 2017 a 70-year-old woman was prosecuted for expressing a 'disparaging view of refugees' on Facebook where she commented on public order disturbances allegedly committed by the migrants. [13] The law does not prohibit a pertinent and responsible debate (en saklig och vederhäftig diskussion), nor statements made in a completely private sphere. [14] There are constitutional restrictions pertaining to which acts are criminalized, as well as limits set by the European Convention on Human Rights. [15]
The sexual orientation provision, added in 2002, [16] was used to convict Pentecostalist pastor Åke Green of hate speech against homosexuality based on a 2003 sermon. His conviction was later overturned. [15] [17]
In May 2017 the Swedish Institute, government agency that maintains Sweden's official Twitter account blacklisted some 14,000 Twitter users allegedly involved in "threats against migrants, women and LGBTQ people" or who were suspected of right-wing extremism. [18] After the public outcry that followed, the ban of the blacklisted users was lifted. [19]
In 2016, the Swedish Police were accused of covering up rape and assault statistics by immigrants [20] shortly thereafter declaring that they wouldn't include ethnic traits anymore when describing alleged criminals. [21]
In late 2019, people working in the Brottsförebyggande Rådet, BRÅ (The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention), stated in interviews that they were censored by the government or leading figures within BRÅ. They claim they were told to change certain crime statistics according to political pressure. In one instance a worker claims to have been called to the Justice Department of the Swedish government where the worker was told that certain parts of a report had to be "corrected". In 2002 a similar alarm about government censorship regarding crime statistics was sounded by researchers. [22] [23]
In Sweden, the criminal offense of denigration (ärekränkning) is regulated in Chapter 5 of the Criminal Code. There have been notable criminal prosecutions of citizens for defamation. For example, Cissi Wallin was convicted of defamation for stating that she was sexually assaulted by Fredrik Virtanen. [24]
The issue of self-censorship within the media has been raised several times in the last ten years.
In 2011–2012, following a large influx of Islamic immigrants coming to Sweden, neo-nazi [25] Ingrid Carlqvist criticized the government's open approach and described the refugees as "dangerous"; many colleagues and politicians accused her of racism and hate speech, and as an answer she founded the Swedish branch of the Danish Free Press Society to fight self-censorship of Swedes. "Sweden does not have Freedom of Press anymore. But not because government took it away, it is because the journalists themselves have abandoned it", she said. "Swedish journalists have forgot what their main mission – to scrutinise the powers. Instead they try to raise the people to think correctly. This has been going on for 15-20 years and was the main reason I left the mainstream-media. ... I was then denounced by almost all of my former colleagues, that spread the rumour that I had gone mad."
The rating agency Freedom House, while rating Sweden very high in all categories, supported her claims in its 2013 assessment of this issue: "Most of the mainstream media view criticism of immigration and Islam as a form of hate speech. In December, the tabloid Aftonbladet launched a campaign against nationalist blogs in order to test the limits of the hate speech law. It also directly called for a government intervention to shut down a number of the right-wing blogs." [26]
A UNHCR 2015 report over the press coverage of the migrant crisis confirms that in Sweden "Overall, the [media] coverage took a positive view of refugees and the contributions that they could make to Swedish society" "most political sources featured in coverage did not discuss refugee issues in a negative way." [27]
Tino Sanandaji wrote in 2018 an article [28] about the dangers of the increasing taboo of talking about immigration in negative terms, commenting that "Exposing negative statistics about immigration sparked angry accusations of bigotry. Establishment voices shied away from the topic for fear of being accused as racist. Opposition to immigration became off-limits within all establishment parties".
A 2020 study by Lund University discusses the impact of fear of hate and threats on journalists' work and the resulting self-censorship. The study revealed that many journalists felt constrained in their reporting due to fear of retaliation from various groups and individuals. The findings emphasized the need to protect press freedom and create safe working environments where journalists can operate without fear of threats and harassment. The findings in the study suggested that if the journalist is young, female, and of foreign origin, the risk increased. Furthermore, if the report covered a sensitive topic such as ethnicity, immigration, or gender equality, the risk was further heightened. [29]
Although Australia is considered to have, in general, both freedom of speech and a free and independent media, certain subject-matter is subject to various forms of government censorship. These include matters of national security, judicial non-publication or suppression orders, defamation law, the federal Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), film and literature classification, and advertising restrictions.
Prior restraint is censorship imposed, usually by a government or institution, on expression, that prohibits particular instances of expression. It is in contrast to censorship that establishes general subject matter restrictions and reviews a particular instance of expression only after the expression has taken place.
The protection of basic human rights is enshrined in Constitution of Malaysia. These include liberty of the person and prohibition of slavery and forced labour. At the national level, legislative measures that exist to prevent human rights violations and abuses can be found in acts and laws on issues that either have a human rights component or relate to certain groups of society whose rights may be at risk of being violated. Human rights groups are generally critical of the Malaysian government and the Royal Malaysia Police. Preventive detention laws such as the Internal Security Act and the Emergency Ordinance 1969 allow for detention without trial or charge and as such are a source of concern for human rights organizations like Suara Rakyat Malaysia.
In Canada, appeals by the judiciary to community standards and the public interest are the ultimate determinants of which forms of expression may legally be published, broadcast, or otherwise publicly disseminated. Other public organisations with the authority to censor include some tribunals and courts under provincial human rights laws, and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, along with self-policing associations of private corporations such as the Canadian Association of Broadcasters and the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council.
Censorship in South Korea is implemented by various laws that were included in the constitution as well as acts passed by the National Assembly over the decades since 1948. These include the National Security Act, whereby the government may limit the expression of ideas that it perceives "praise or incite the activities of anti-state individuals or groups". Censorship was particularly severe during the country's authoritarian era, with freedom of expression being non-existent, which lasted from 1948 to 1993.
Germany has taken many forms throughout the history of censorship in the country. Various regimes have restricted the press, cinema, literature, and other entertainment venues. In contemporary Germany, the Grundgesetz generally guarantees freedom of press, speech, and opinion.
The Federal Republic of Germany guarantees freedom of speech, expression, and opinion to its citizens as per Article 5 of the constitution. Despite this, censorship of various materials has taken place since the Allied occupation after World War II and continues to take place in Germany in various forms due to a limiting provision in Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the constitution. In 2014 the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index ranked Germany as 14th in the world in terms of press freedom. During the Allied occupation of Germany, the media was controlled by the occupying forces. The policy rationales differed among the occupying powers, but there was resentment in literary and journalistic circles in many parts of the country. Undesired publishing efforts were unilaterally blocked by the occupying forces.
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient". Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and other controlling bodies.
Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment. "Speech" is not limited to public speaking and is generally taken to include other forms of expression. The right is preserved in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is granted formal recognition by the laws of most nations. Nonetheless, the degree to which the right is upheld in practice varies greatly from one nation to another. In many nations, particularly those with authoritarian forms of government, overt government censorship is enforced. Censorship has also been claimed to occur in other forms and there are different approaches to issues such as hate speech, obscenity, and defamation laws.
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. The right to freedom of expression has been recognised as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law by the United Nations. Many countries have constitutional law that protects free speech. Terms like free speech, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression are used interchangeably in political discourse. However, in a legal sense, the freedom of expression includes any activity of seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.
Speech crimes are certain kinds of speech that are criminalized by promulgated laws or rules. Criminal speech is a direct preemptive restriction on freedom of speech, and the broader concept of freedom of expression.
Censorship in Bangladesh refers to the government censorship of the press and infringement of freedom of speech. Article 39 of the constitution of Bangladesh protects free speech.
Freedom of expression in Canada is protected as a "fundamental freedom" by section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; however, in practice the Charter permits the government to enforce "reasonable" limits censoring speech. Hate speech, obscenity, and defamation are common categories of restricted speech in Canada. During the 1970 October Crisis, the War Measures Act was used to limit speech from the militant political opposition.
Book Censorship in Canada is primarily limited to the control of which books may be imported. Canada Border Services Agency is able to block materials considered to be inappropriate from entering the country, although this practice has become less frequent since the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was put into place.
In the Philippines, censorship involves the control of certain information.
Tino Sanandaji is an Iranian–Swedish economist and author born in Tehran, Iran, who resides in Stockholm, Sweden.
Human rights in Sweden are largely protected in the country's constitution and ratified international law. The three Constitutional acts concerning human rights are Chapter 2 of the Instrument of Government, Regeringsformen, the Freedom of the Press Act, Tryckfrihetsförordningen (1949) and Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression, Yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen (1991). Additionally, the European Convention on Human Rights has been incorporated into Swedish domestic law since 1995.
This list of Internet censorship and surveillance in Europe provides information on the types and levels of Internet censorship and surveillance that is occurring in countries in Europe.
Freedom of the press in Pakistan is legally protected by the law of Pakistan as stated in its constitutional amendments, while the sovereignty, national integrity, and moral principles are generally protected by the specified media law, Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002, and Code of Conduct Rules 2010. In Pakistan, the code of conduct and ordinance act comprises a set of rules for publishing, distributing, and circulating news stories and operating media organizations working independently or running in the country.
Hate speech is public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. Hate speech is "usually thought to include communications of animosity or disparagement of an individual or a group on account of a group characteristic such as race, colour, national origin, sex, disability, religion, or sexual orientation".