The proposal for mandatory notification should be stayed

The proposal for mandatory reporting for public servants has received a lot of criticism. The reporting law, as called for in the debate, requires individual employees to report those staying in Sweden without permission. This applies to everyone in the state and municipal and regional sector – even those not normally tasked with checking whether people have a right to stay in the country or their legal compliance.

Many have reacted strongly against the idea that a nurse should be forced to report her patient, a violation of professional ethics, or a teacher should be forced to report his student, violating children’s rights. The ST department at Uppsala University and I share this criticism, but we are concerned about what this means for our democracy and for us.

A general notification obligation of this kind is a new innovation in Swedish public administration. It risks fundamentally changing our management culture, with devastating consequences for trust in many workplaces.

As an officer in a university, I ask myself: Who do I report to?

A failed student whose visa is expired? Or a guest researcher suffering from long processing times at the Swedish Migration Agency? Or a British citizen who failed to submit the correct form when Britain left the EU? As an immigrant from England, I know that the latter is not as unusual as one might think. I wonder if I might make people suspicious – would it be better if I brought my Swedish passport to work?

Because while the debate is mainly about how it would affect health and schools, it would force all public employees — including ST members at universities — to report undocumented people.

It is our duty to doubt. When we meet students, PhD students or visitors to the library, we should be prepared to check that their documents are in order.

Otherwise, we may get ourselves into trouble. Can I be reported for failing to mention someone?

Doubt is added to doubt, and that will erode the trust that underpins Sweden’s democracy and interests.

We know which groups the racists behind the motion want to target with people’s suspicions and mistrust. People are portrayed as enemies. Today it is mainly people with roots in Muslim countries, but tomorrow it could be another minority.

Personally, I am firmly in the left party opposing the Whistleblowing Act, but I don’t see this as a party political issue. It is important to be clear: segregation, suspicion and racial discrimination are the targets of whistleblowing laws. It goes against everything our democracy stands for – equal value for all people, as stated in the form of government.

I am therefore pleased that my union has distanced itself from the government’s proposal, and that my employer, Uppsala University, has done the same, with Chancellor Anders Hockfeld’s statement. Exempting healthcare workers or teachers is not enough, this proposal is a step towards a society where reporting racism must stop.

Neil Ormerod
Section board member of the ST union at Uppsala University