The case Putilov – an eye opener – Smålandsposten

We now have democracy of good and evil. It means that anyone who stands for election to parliament, has the right to reside there without the security police, Säpo, can do something about it, even if it is obvious that the person is dangerous for national security. The person has the confidence amongst the voters.

the Case of Putilov highlights the question of principle was the limit for this trust should be deducted. Means confidence that the parliamentarian may employ whom he pleases? Can the electorate’s trust be delegated to officials? Can officials delegate it further? It is a chain and how far it extends in this case?

In the present case, one party, The sweden democrats, employed a person whose history is reasonably disqualifies him from any contact with maktbärande institutions. Had the party been in government, had their recruitment is filtered through the Säpos assessment and have stopped. In this case it is a question about access to parliament house and then the control of another, let us say, more sweeping, character. Putilov has passed, figuratively and literally. The party leadership makes no effort to want to kick him.

It’s the one that goes to learn from this story; that the parties or förtroendevaldas freedom of movement should be subject to a clear limitation in terms of in person.

The second insight, The sweden democrats are bidding on is how unreliable the party is when it comes to Russian intressepolitik. His interests and actions corresponding to the typmönstret and the tenacity of a foreign statsunderstödd judy desinformatör. It is no coincidence that he has sought to right The sweden democrats, and it is no coincidence that they opened their arms for him and refuses to take a distance from him.

Again, this odor from The sweden democrats. This supposedly patriotic party whose speech is about the american loyalty, but whose every motion as soon as it is about Russia reveals a deeply unhealthy culture. It is not a question that they as well as the left manages a legacy of appeasement towards Russia, but worse; they show constant signs on to experience a valfrändskap with the current Russian regime.

In that sense, it is the case Putilov an eye-opener for all. Not least for many of the sweden democrats voters.

Quotes: Can the voters trust should be delegated to officials? Can officials delegate it further?