In december 2015, an agreement was reached between the six parties on the measures against terrorism. After the terrible attack on Drottninggatan shopping street in Stockholm in april 2017 signed a new agreement with additional major actions in which the government agreed to our demands to increase the security service’s access to intelligence information from the signal intelligence, the police opportunities to video surveillance and the criminalisation of participation in terrorist organisations.
we are Now in march 2019. The permit for police surveillance has still not been abolished. The secret police have not had access to signals intelligence during the preliminary investigation, or a new functioning regulation of data storage. Secret serial data is not permitted and affiliated with terrorist organisations have still not criminalised. The penalties for terrorismrelaterad crime has not been tightened. The list can be long.
Here, the government is still the answer required.
the penalties for participating in a terror organization is proposed to correspond to the penalties for theft is indicative of an inability to see the seriousness of the situation. The penalties for the related crime should be stepped up significantly to better reflect the gravity and put them in the context where they belong.
We conservatives also want to give the police additional tools. Secret rumsavlyssning should be possible in the case of serious crimes with terrorkoppling and the possibilities to use the so-called preventive coercive measures, which can be used without a preliminary inquiry is ongoing, needs to be increased. The security service should have the opportunity to be able to call each ICE-returner to questioning. This unlike today when it is required that there is an ongoing investigation of a breach, where the returned figures in the investigation. This means that both the evidence that intelligence is liable to be lost.
No one knows if the new caliphate will emerge in the future. The conservatives want a Swedish citizenship will be revoked in the case where someone with dual citizenship committed a terrorist offence. This possibility already exists in a number of european countries, but it is missing in Sweden. As late as the other day concluded a broad political agreement in Germany between the right and left of the question.
Why is it so important for Mikael Damberg and Morgan Johansson not to create the opportunity to be able to revoke the citizenship of those who commit serious terrorist offences?