Signal & Brus

🇸🇪 Svenska · 🇬🇧 English · 🇪🇸 Español

I am usually critical of red lines in politics. Parties should be able to talk to one another and find solutions for Sweden. But when it comes to the Left Party entering government, I have to agree with the Centre Party. A party that repeatedly fails to vet its own representatives should not be entrusted with the keys to the Government Offices.

The case of Mohamed Abdukardir Ali is yet another example. The Left Party placed him on its parliamentary list. Voters then used preference votes to elect him to a seat. The party had therefore judged him suitable to represent it in Sweden’s parliament.

According to 100 procent’s review of the documents in the citizenship case, Ali denied in his 2023 application that he had debts that had been referred to the Swedish Enforcement Authority, despite an ongoing debt restructuring process. In a later appeal, he stated that the debt had been repaid in full. According to the review, this did not match the Enforcement Authority’s records. He was granted citizenship in February 2026. The documents reviewed by the publication do not explain why the Swedish Migration Agency then reached a different assessment.

Incorrect information to public authorities and contradictory statements about his own debts. That is the sort of judgement the Left Party’s candidate-vetting process allowed through. I find it completely unacceptable.

The suspicions of electoral fraud surrounding the preference-vote campaign are a separate matter. Ali denies involvement, and the party announced that he would take time out. I do not base my conclusion on any claim that he has been convicted of electoral fraud. SVT has also shown that claims that he confessed to electoral fraud and was arrested are false.

But the problem does not end with Ali. In June, 25 Left Party candidates were removed following Expressen’s investigation into, among other things, antisemitism and praise for terrorism. In September, another eight followed. SVT then reported a total of 33 removed candidates. These were candidates for various elected bodies, not 33 members of parliament. But the same party is responsible for deciding whom it puts forward.

Once can be a mistake. Twice should trigger serious self-examination. When dozens of people are involved, the excuse of isolated mistakes has been exhausted. To me, it looks like a habit: put the candidates forward and clean up after journalists expose them. If that is how the vetting works, the party has effectively chosen to let the media do its job.

Removing people after revelations is necessary. But it does not automatically restore confidence in those who approved the candidates in the first place.

You do not let the wolf guard the sheep or a paedophile work in a nursery. In the same way, it must be possible to deny a party a responsibility it has shown itself unable to bear. Anyone who wants to help govern the country must at least be capable of vetting their own representatives.

Left Party voters are entitled to representation. Their votes must be counted and their seats respected. But a parliamentary seat is not a ticket to a cabinet post. Other parties are under no obligation to give the Left Party additional power or access to the government’s internal work and sensitive information.

The Centre Party says no to the Left Party in government. On this particular point, it is right. Democracy requires us to respect the election result. It does not require us to reward a party that repeatedly demonstrates such poor judgement with the keys to governing the country.

The image is AI-generated.