Supervisory Authorities – Lackeys of the Political Establishment?
Abstract
In theory, supervisory authorities are intended to safeguard citizens against abuses of power, ensure the protection of individual rights, and hold the state accountable for its actions.
In today’s Sweden, however, these authorities have deteriorated into little more than institutional alibis for political power, not independent overseers, but loyal instruments of a political system unwilling to recognize its own transgressions.
Sweden’s Political Establishment – A Circus?
Mandate of Supervisory Authorities – Facade of the Rule of Law
Sweden’s Instrument of Government and the Administrative Procedure Act mandate that public authorities exercise their power objectively, impartially, and independently. Supervisory bodies such as the Administrative Court, the Parliamentary Ombudsman (JO), the Health and Social Care Inspectorate (IVO), and the Chancellor of Justice (JK) are tasked with scrutinizing the exercise of state power, securing legal certainty, and protecting individual rights.
Family Law & Child Rights in Sweden – Theory & Reality
In practice, however, they have become the opposite: gatekeepers for the system they are meant to monitor, enabling abuses to persist behind a veneer of legality.
Despite countless reports of serious misconduct across healthcare, public administration, and the judicial system, most investigations end in vague, consequence-free statements. The true centers of power pretend to be blind to systemic failures, and citizens’ legal protections are reduced to little more than a theoretical ideal.
1. The Administrative Court – A Formalistic Gatekeeper
Originally conceived as a safeguard against arbitrary public authority, the Administrative Court frequently functions instead as a formalistic gatekeeper. Its reviews are often limited to administrative checks of procedural formalities, rather than substantive examinations of rights violations.
Serious allegations of misconduct are routinely met with reflexive affirmation of public authorities’ accounts, with little meaningful analysis of evidence or the individual’s legal protections. As a result, citizens’ rights are systematically weakened, while official actions are cloaked in the appearance of legality and impartiality.
2. The Parliamentary Ombudsman (JO) – A System Loyal Observer
The Parliamentary Ombudsman (JO) is one of Sweden’s most frequently approached supervisory bodies — and one of the least effective. Thousands of citizens each year turn to JO with complaints of abuses and rights violations. Yet JO seldom demands meaningful change, accountability, or redress.
What was meant to be a shield against arbitrariness has become a validator of systemic dysfunction.
Criticism from JO rarely carries consequences; even serious infringements of rights are met with “remarkable” but ultimately toothless statements. In practice, JO serves more as a vent for public frustration than a genuine instrument of justice.
3. The Health and Social Care Inspectorate (IVO) – An Inspection Without Accountability
IVO plays a crucial role in overseeing municipalities, institutions, and compulsory care interventions under Sweden’s Care of Young Persons Act (LVU). Yet even in the face of extensive reports of abuse, structural failures, and severe shortcomings within social services and healthcare, clear interventions are rare.
IVO relies heavily on self-reporting, lacks coercive authority, and often chooses “not to pursue further action”.
Many parents, children, and affected individuals describe IVO as a defender of the system, not an independent reviewer. The result is the institutionalization of arbitrariness and a profound erosion of public trust in state institutions.
4. The Chancellor of Justice (JK) – Institutional Indifference
The Chancellor of Justice (JK) is tasked with representing the state while simultaneously safeguarding the principles of the rule of law. In reality, JK displays marked institutional indifference toward individual rights.
Most complaints are summarily dismissed without proper investigation, often relying on standardized responses that fail to engage with the substantive issues raised. Rather than acting as an impartial protector of rights, JK consistently prioritizes shielding the state from accountability.
Through its passivity, the Chancellor of Justice perpetuates systemic imbalances and contributes to the normalization of state misconduct.
5. Systemic Immunity – When the State Oversees Itself
All these supervisory authorities share the same fundamental flaw: they are embedded within the very system they are charged with monitoring. They are appointed by the government, funded by state resources, and thus have every incentive to avoid upsetting the political equilibrium.
The result is a closed loop of power, where accountability is illusory, and loyalty is rewarded.
Superficial reviews replace meaningful oversight, and citizens’ faith in justice steadily erodes.
Conclusion: Democracy in Decay Behind Ready-Made Phrases
What we are witnessing in Sweden today is not a functioning supervisory model, but a democratic facade — a democratic dictatorship that systematically ignores its citizens. Supervisory authorities have been reduced to a thin veneer of control, while real power is exercised without opposition, transparency, or consequence.
For the individual citizen, this is nothing short of a tragedy: when rights are violated, there is no protection, no recourse, no redress.
Sweden does not need more guidelines or symbolic reforms. It needs a complete structural overhaul:
- Truly independent oversight,
- External supervision,
- Real consequences for abuses, and
- Clear, enforceable accountability.
Otherwise, our so-called rights will remain just that — so-called.
“When the state is allowed to oversee itself, the outcome is always the same: freedom is lost, and the democratic dictatorship thrives”.
Source:
The Decline of Democracy
Updated: July 24, 2023
Originally Published: March 28, 2012 – Still Urgently Relevant
Reporter: Ingo Schulze
Author:
Leon (Nic. Cheropoulos)
Father of Anthie and Alexandra
Published: April 27, 2025
EN 
RU 
UA 
SK 
IT 
EL 
SV