Powered by WebAds

Monday, October 13, 2014

Swedish legislator: Prime Minister's recognition of 'Palestine' illegal

Benny Weinthal reports that a Swedish legislator claims that his Prime Minister's recognition of the imaginary state of 'Palestine' is illegal.
In a telephone interview with The Jerusalem Post on Monday, Swedish deputy Annicka Engblom, from the center-right Moderaterna (Moderate) party, said she filed a complaint with the parliament’s Committee on the Constitution because the prime minister “violated the law.”

There is a way to handle “issues which have a great impact Swedish foreign policy,” she said. There are procedural steps that must be “taken to recognize a state, especially in a conflict of this magnitude.”

According to Engblom, [Swedish Prime Minister Stefan] Löfven should have sent the proposal to recognize a Palestinian state to the Advisory Council on Foreign Affairs, which functions under the parliament and is chaired by the king.

Löfven bypassed the council on Friday, prompting outrage in the parliament.

Some of the deputies “jumped in our seats as we heard the prime minister, because his decision was stated as already made,” Engblom said.

The Committee on the Constitution will convene a hearing in the spring on the prime minister’s recognition of a Palestinians state. If he is found to have violated Swedish law, the committee could reprimand him, and “politically, this is very severe in politics,” Engblom said.
Now that he's been called on it, Löfven and his representatives are claiming that they did not recognize 'Palestine.'
Legislator Marie Granlund, from the prime minister’s Social Democratic Party and deputy chairwoman of the parliament’s Committee on European Union Affairs, did not immediately respond to Post telephone and email queries. She told the Svenska Dagbladet newspaper that Löfven’s recognition of “Palestine” was not a decision but a declaration of intent. When the time comes, the decision will “of course” be brought to the Advisory Committee for Foreign Affairs for discussions, she said.
Unfortunately, that has all the effect of a New York Times 'correction' where the original headline is on page 1 and the 'correction' is on page 29.

Read the whole thing.

Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home