On friendly favoritism

and worse

Spotlight on the Swedish police
image source: Johan Nilsson, TT / www.arbetaren.se

Nepotism comes from the Latin word for nephew, “nepos.” Already in the 1650s, the word nepotism was used to describe granting favors to favorites – in particular, granting high offices to family members. It was first used to refer to the papal habit of appointing “nephews” (or illegitimate sons) to high positions in the church.

Nepotism has other family members. Cronyism, discrimination, bias, and plain old favoritism are other names for giving unwarranted preferential treatment. A beloved child has many names, as the Swedish saying goes. Nepotism’s offshoots only show how common it is perceived to be.

Calling all units

Nepotism and suspicions of nepotism are crippling for any organization. They are even worse when they concern the highest positions in an organization. Especially an organization founded on a mission to uphold the rule of law.

The death of Stockholm’s Chief of Police Mats Löfving was the tragic end to a case of perceived nepotism. Löfving was relieved from his post pending the results of an investigation into his promoting his subordinate colleague and girlfriend to a high position in the police. He was also suspected of influencing the salary she was paid, of giving her the right to bear a service weapon, and lying about his relationship in the first place. The day after the investigation’s results were made public, absolving him from some transgressions but raising the possibility of others, Löfving was found dead in his Norrköping apartment.

Just helping out a friend

While cases of outright nepotism or discrimination are rare, cases of “friendly favoritism” or vänskapskorruption are considered common in Sweden. A study from Transparency International in 2021 found that nearly a third of respondents believed that the level of corruption has increased over the last five years. Twenty percent of Swedish respondents added that they themselves have availed themselves of personal contacts to skip a queue or otherwise get access to a service. No one can deny that personal contacts are key to finding, and getting, a job.

Friendly favoritism or outright nepotism in law enforcement, however, is particularly grievous. Not only is public trust undermined, but the morale and motivation of an already understaffed and pressed police force crumbles. As late as May, 2022, a questionnaire conducted by the Police Union found that four of ten police were actively looking for another job. This, in the midst of almost daily shootings and bombings, is a catastrophe.

A glimmer

Tragically and ironically, it was Löfving who in 2020 first broke the silence and went public on just how widespread clans’ criminal activities actually were in the Stockholm area. It caused a furor, but it also opened a lot of eyes. His death might do the same.  

11 Nov. – a name, a vote, and a meeting

can this wave be stopped?
pic: watersource.awa.asn.au

In the wake of the shooting and the explosion over the weekend, that the police now suspect are connected, there are several actions in the works: the police have labelled their response an “extraordinary operation” (särskilt händelse), the Moderate party has said they are behind the Sweden Democrats’ decision to call a vote of no confidence in Minister for Justice Morgan Johansson, and the Malmö police are organizing a special conference, with the local criminals.

Only the terrorist attack on the pedestrians on Drottninggatan in April of 2017, and the forest fires in the summer of 2018, have previously been classified as “extraordinary operations” by the police department. The current operation is being called Operation Rimfrost (hoarfrost in English), and allows the police department to make the decision-making process faster and increases their authority to reprioritize and move police forces around. “The number of persons in criminal networks shall be reduced by force” said Stefan Hector, chief of operations for NOA, the national operations division, “by which we mean arrests, charges and sentencing.” The police hope to seize more weapons and explosives as well. “In about 6 months we will have seen a difference” Hector predicted (SvD.se/rimfrost).

In related news, the Sweden Democrats have said they will be bringing a motion of no confidence in Minister for Justice Johansson to the floor at the party leader debate on Wednesday – and the Moderate party has said they will support it. Jimmie Åkesson, leader of the Sweden Democrats, declared that it was “obvious that the Minister for Justice, who in this case has the ultimate responsibility to handle this situation, does not understand its seriousness. He can’t handle it, and therefore parliament should in some way make clear its dissatisfaction with the work that is unfortunately not happening” (SR.se/Åkesson).

Moderate party leader Ulf Kristersson echoed his colleague. “It is right to direct a vote of no confidence in the Minister for Justice. For the last five years, he has been ultimately responsible for the situation we’ve arrived at in Sweden. It’s untenable. Either the minister does his job or he takes the consequences and resigns. We will be voting no confidence” (SR.se/Åkesson).

For a vote of no confidence to go through, at least 35 parliament members need to demand it. If a majority in parliament (175 members) vote yes, the minister in question must resign. So far, in Swedish history, there have only been nine – count ’em, nine – votes of no confidence. None of them has ever resulted in a minister’s resignation.

As far the other more right parties go, the Liberals have said they will not support a vote of no confidence, but that the government must “take vigorous measures against gangs.” The Christian Democrats haven’t yet commented. It is unlikely in the extreme that the more left Green or Center party will support it, altogether making the resignation of Johansson equally unlikely. The Moderate party’s youth wing, MuF, went its mother party one better and demanded a vote of no confidence in not just the Minister of Justice Johansson, but also on Minister for Home Affairs Mikael Damberg (DN.se/MuF). That one won’t be going anywhere, for the moment at least.

Meanwhile, the local police in Malmö have called a meeting for Tuesday. With the local criminals. The criminals that come don’t have to be the most violent ones, or the leaders – as long as they have legitimacy and that the others “listen when they talk” said Glen Sjögren, coordinator the “Stop Shooting” project (read more about the project here).

“We’re giving them a message – that we don’t want them to die and we don’t want them to kill someone. If they, or someone in their group, commit a crime involving lethal violence or explosives we’re going to focus on their whole group. If they want to leave their criminal life behind them, we’re ready to help them with that too” said Sjögren. “The goal is to stop the current crime wave and to prevent an escalation” (DN.se/slutaskjuta).

It seems like it’s all hands on deck, but whether or not talking leads to actions and then to an effect is anyone’s guess.

3 sep. – Torell trial

pic: black ribbon publicdomainvectors.org

Trial began today in a tragic case of police shooting. For those who weren’t around, 20-year old Eric Torell was shot to death by three police responding to a middle-of-the-night call about an armed gunman. Eric Torell was autistic and had Downs syndrome. He was holding a plastic shotgun, and was shot at 25 times, of which three bullets hit him.

According to the prosecution, the first shots could be considered self-defense because the plastic weapon could easily be mistaken for an actual gun. However, Eric Torell was clearly turning in or after those first seconds, and two bullets hit him in the back. Those bullets, say the prosecutor, were not self-defense. The court will have to decide if, in that brief interval, the police ought to have stopped and are therefore guilty as charged.

The officer who hit Torell in the back is charged with misconduct, and the police whose bullet was the killing shot is charged with involuntary manslaughter. The officer in charge of the response is charged with misconduct as well, in that the police response was poorly led. All three officers are pleading innocent. That shots were fired at all, or that the victim had an intellectual disability is not relevant to the case at hand. Instead, the case centers on how the police understood the situation and if their actions were motivated (bit.ly/SvDTorell1).

Whatever the outcome, there is no happy ending to this story, nothing that will change the events of that August night. Perhaps the best that can be decided is a clearer understanding of responsibilities – on the part of the police, and, on the part of the general public.