Academic literature on the topic 'Demonstrationsfrihet'

The European Convention guarantees the right to assembly. Since the ratification of the Convention Sweden has been obligated to make proportionality balances when granting or restricting the right. However, the process of how the proportionality assessments work when cancelling or dissipating a public gathering, and thereby limit the right to protest, is unmapped. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the legal problems that emerges by studying the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s and the Chancellor of Justice’s proportionality assessments relating to the right to protest. This will be done by comparing nine decisions made by the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice between 1995 and today (2017).   The study concludes that the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice overall made proportionality assessments and thereby respected the principle of proportionality. However, some legal problems complicated the assessments. The definition of resolution, public gathering and severe disorder can differ, which can result in discretional exercise of official authority. This may, in turn, restrict the freedom of assembly and thereby be a threat to the democracy.

Demonstrationsfriheten i Sverige är en frihet som omfattar alla. Regeringsformen lyder enligt följande. “Var och en är tillförsäkrad, [...] 4 demonstrationsfrihet: frihet att anordna och delta i demonstrationer på allmän plats, [...]” Demonstrationsfriheten fastställs även i den europeiska konventionen för mänskliga rättigheter, vilket införts i regeringsformen. Demonstrationsfriheten är därmed inte endast en medborgerlig rättighet. Rätten att demonstrera är dock inte absolut. Giltiga grunder för inskränkande av demonstrationsfriheten är flera. I Europakonventionen fastställs det att fri- och rättigheterna i konventionen får begränsas i den mån de är godtagbara i ett “demokratiskt samhälle”, samt att dessa begränsningar ska framgå i nationell lag. Genom europeisk praxis och publiceringar från europadomstolen kan vi konstatera att dessa begränsningar endast får tillämpas när myndigheter uttömt sina resurser. Syftet med detta är att myndigheterna skall garantera ett fredligt utövande av alla fri- och rättigheter vilka föreskrivs i Europakonventionen. Här blir det då tydligt att garanten för fri- och rättigheterna är staten. Positiva och negativa rättigheter åläggs staten. Staten ska skapa ett skydd för utövandet mellan människor, samtidigt ska staten begränsa sig själv genom att inte begränsa utövandet av de föreskrivna fri- och rättigheter annat än vad som är godtagbart i ett demokratiskt samhälle.

Police brutality is a problematic feature of the American society that has caused civil unrest among the vast majority. The excessive use of force from American police forces sparked off a wave of protests during 2020 in which people called for the abolishment of unnecessary and unethical police violence against civilians. The importance of the Black Lives Matter movement has been highlighted by the authoritarian response to the protests and the inhumane treatment of ethnic minorities in the United States. But given the strong protection of the freedom of speech and the freedom of assembly in the U.S. constitution, the problem seems to be intertwined with inappropriate attitudes of officials rather than written shortcomings in the law. In this thesis, I investigate how structural racism has affected the freedom of assembly in the United States, which is done through a critical review of relevant literature and documents concerning contemporary challenges for the Black Lives Matter movement. Various reports have addressed the mishandling of Black Lives Matter protests from American police forces and their arbitrarily use of the law to disperse them, e.g., by classifying predominantly peaceful demonstrations as “unlawful assemblies”. This is the kind of dishonest behaviour that I scrutinize further in this study, which is of great importance since it affects peoples’ human rights and ultimately threatens the collective well-being of the American people.  I also investigate and critically discuss the components of a sustainable understanding of the freedom of assembly, which is done through a theoretical analysis of the views of Ronald Dworkin and Jeremy Waldron. From this analysis, I learn about substantial problems that may arise from different theoretical understandings of this right and about the importance of spreading awareness of different forms of racism. Only by acknowledging the existence of racism in our societies, we can protect vulnerable groups from derogatory behaviours and together achieve social justice.

Nazi demonstrations have in recent years become a recurring theme in Swedish media. In the summer of 2018 public opinion against the Nazi demonstrations became so strong that the governing party proclaimed that the Swedish Nazi party should be banned. A majority of the other parties agreed. What effect a party ban would have on the freedom of demonstration is however unclear and the purpose of this paper is therefore to examine that subject. To achieve that purpose the paper examines the extent of the freedom of demon- stration in the Swedish constitution and its subsequent laws. In this section, the paper highlights that a demonstration where the organizer hasn’t applied for a demonstration permit still has the same rights as a demonstration where the or- ganizer has a permit. The findings in the paper also shows that current case law advocates that if a crime is being committed during a demonstration the police should wait with arresting suspects, provided the arrests would in effect dissolve the demonstration and as long as the crime is not obvious. The paper moreover examines the exemption in the Swedish constitution that supposedly allows for the banning of Nazi organizations. The conclusion is that the exemption must be characterized as a relatively narrow one. The exemption allows for only the banning of such racist groups that persecute a distinct ethnic or racial group – in contrast with for instance the persecution of refugees in gen- eral. The paper furthermore argues that the word persecution should be inter- preted as meaning repeated acts of violence or threats, although merely hate speech might arguably be sufficient as well. Altogether, this strong protection for the freedom of demonstration, in combi- nation with the narrow exemption for banning racist parties, makes it appear as uncertain how effective a party ban would be in suppressing Nazi demonstra-tions. The paper’s final section thus discusses whether other measures should be considered. In this discussion the argument is made that a constitutional change that would limit the right of demonstration solely for Nazi or similar groups would probably be the most proportional and effective way of stopping Nazi demonstrations.