Criticism of a head of section at the Migration Agency’s detention centre in Mölndal after she made statements in an email that could be perceived as retaliation and a restriction of the freedom of expression of employees

In an email to everyone at one of the Migration Agency’s detention centres, a head of section complained that employees had sent emails, internally and externally, to authorities and the media, in which they expressed dissatisfaction with their employer. In a statement to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the Migration Agency stated that the head of section did not know at the time the email was sent that there had been contact with the media.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman states that the head of section’s email undoubtedly gives the impression that she was aware that employees had had contact with the media. However, it cannot be considered to have been established that the email was retaliation for someone using their freedom of expression in the forms specifically provided for under the Freedom of the Press Act or the fundamental right to freedom of expression.

According to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the email was a reaction to email correspondence in which some officials were openly critical of the organisation. The head of section may therefore, according to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, be considered to have taken a retaliatory measure in contravention of the constitutional right to freedom of expression. The Parliamentary Ombudsman states that even employees who did not criticise the workplace conditions may have perceived the head of section’s email to be a restriction of their freedom of expression and that the head of section should have realised that the email could have been perceived in this way.

The head of section is criticised for how she expressed herself in the email.