Last July, the Swedish government launched a proposal that requires proof of democratic conditions of religious organisations and some others to be able to receive a grant. Christian representatives, but also secular organisations, raise their voices in protest.
The government's proposal applies first to religious communities (except for the Church of Sweden) and organisations that receive grants from the general heritage fund. In the future, the democratic conditions should apply to all actors that receive grants from the Swedish government.
The proposal may “severely curtail the democratic space” the Christian organisations PMU (Swedish Pentecostals), Act Svenska kyrkan (Poverty organisation from the Swedish Church), and the Swedish Mission Council write in a debate article in Svenska Dagbladet, as reported by Dagen. They are supported by several secular organisations, such as Naturskyddsföreningen (an environmental organisation) and Kvinna till kvinna (A charity organisation that supports women in war zones).
The authors of the debate article are “deeply concerned” about the bill. They argue that if the bill is passed, it might have the opposite effect of what it aims for. “It might contribute to counteracting both democratic development and religious freedom”, they write. Although they agree that the “exercise of threats, coercion, violence, discrimination and otherwise countering democracy” is a “solid ground for exclusion”, they point out that the bill's implementation will lead to new problems.
Afraid to be a representative
First, the authors are concerned that the government will start investigations on individual volunteers from organisations that receive grants. The conduct of a “representative”, who might be an underage volunteer, can be scrutinised without his or her knowledge, the organisations argue in their article. “Such an investigation does not require a conviction or police report. It is enough that a decision-making authority considers itself to have sufficient reasons to start an investigation and then strong enough reasons to withdraw support”, they warn, adding that they are unsure whether this is legally allowed.
People may be afraid to be seen as representatives of organisations and bear the responsibility for whether associations are eligible for grants, Christian Democrat Jakob Forssmed, writes in Dagen. He argues that the proposal is unclear about whom is considered to be a representative of an organisation. Forssmed warns that this unclarity may result in a loss of trust between civil society and the state. Instead, a culture of suspicion would arise, he suspects. “That results in reduced commitment and a weaker civil society that quickly withdraws when we need its efforts the most.”
Cancel culture
Secondly, the bill could lead to a cancel culture in civil society, or organisations may choose not to apply for grants anymore and end their cooperation with the state, the authors of the debate article in Svenska Dagbladet add.
Jakob Forssmed agrees that the government proposal might lead to the opposite of promoting democracy. “Moderate communities and associations risk losing money due to the actions of individual representatives”, he writes. “The result may actually be that extreme organisations that receive their funding from abroad are strengthened.”
Currently, the Swedish government is also looking at the possibilities of banning foreign grants to religious organisations. They are discussing how legislation can be formulated and whether the ban should apply to financial contributions from all countries, for example.
