[ad_1]
Swedish democrats have rarely did they go through a wide door that they did not try to strike with much enthusiasm. In Gothenburg, the party, like many other municipalities, voted for an extension of local regulations to ban calls to prayer. The motion, drafted by party group leader Jörgen Fogelklou, was tabled last spring – and now reports from different parts of the municipality have begun arriving. Among the respondents, there are several district councils, some unions and Framtiden AB (which refrain from commenting when the company does not consider the problem in question).
All the commissions reject the motion and emphasize that it is already clear today that there are rules to address the question of whether they would be relevant – and that it is a question of Order in its true sense.
SDN Lundby means that the regulations in force concerning the transmission of information, publicity, propaganda or other messages intended for persons in public places are amply sufficient to deal with requests for permission for religious messages. In addition, it should be noted that municipalities should only have rules and prohibitions that are "genuinely necessary for the maintenance of law and order". In addition, the Commission considers that it can not prove that the number of applications for authorization for prayer calls is so important that it justifies a general prohibition. The council can not see either that in Lundby, with dozens of religious communities, there has even been an interest or received a request for religious invocation.
In Askim-Frölunda-Högsbo, the Administration found no reason to change the local regulations and found that the regulations in force are in place if they are applicable: "In accordance with section 2 of Chapter 3 of the ordinance, the police authority conducts an individual assessment of each new request for religious invitation in public places. The police authority must obtain the opinion of the municipality before obtaining the authorization. The district administration believes that the regulations currently available are sufficient and meet the requirement of legal certainty. Therefore, it is not necessary to extend the regulation through local regulations."
What can The Committee on Culture has formulated the most relevant commentary beyond the regulations in force: "Since the definition of cultural heritage is not fixed, but variable and determined by the inhabitants of Gothenburg, the cultural administration can not subscribe to the prohibition of "religious invitations incompatible with our Swedish cultural heritage"."
The Gothenburg SD totally ignores the regulations or tries to cook the soup on a rusty nail. Stranger still, the SD motion is based on the report that P4 Göteborg sent earlier this fall and which showed that the Sunni Muslim mosque in Gothenburg was not even interested in applying for public prayer calls but that She preferred applications reminding Muslims of the time to pray.
"The majority are not Muslims in mosques, so it is very important for us not to interfere with their environment and to re-establish ourselves in the surrounding area," Mohammad Al-Alti Mohammad El-Alti said.
The responses of the various committees posed an important question: Why do Swedish Democrats not trust the Swedish police to make informed decisions if the problem should be relevant?
Csaba Bene Perlenberg is an independent columnist on the GT side
Source link
