Use of Emergency Powers in Sweden and Norway During the Covid-19 Pandemic

With the global pandemic of Covid-19 approximately 300,000 deaths globally have occurred at the time of writing. The virus has caused governments across the world to bring in emergency powers in an effort to reduce the number of deaths in their country. Internationally, countries have taken a range of approaches in an effort to slow down the spread of the virus.

It is interesting to compare Norway and Sweden, two countries which lie next to one another geographically, and enjoy close trading, employment and other social links. There had been a formal union between these countries under a common monarch until 1905. Over a century later Sweden is a member of the European Union, while Norway, although closely tied politically to the EU, is not a member state. However, both countries have a full democracy, and sit at the top of the Democracy Index with Norway at #1 and Sweden at #3.

It is strange, therefore, to find that it is Sweden that has taken a very different approach to dealing with Covid-19 to the other member states of the EU. Whereas ‘independent’ Norway has followed the more conventional route taken by most other countries. It is not simply a case of the practical steps deemed necessary to protect their population, but what emergency power will the state require to do this.

The Swedish Government have taken the approach of trying to attain herd immunity. This will be achieved when a large proportion of the population have become immune to the virus, this provides some form of protection to those who are not immune. The Swedish Government at first imposed few rules on their population, they have made suggestions regarding social distancing etc., but the responsibility lies with the individual. Also, there was no provision in the Swedish constitution to allow imposition of a state of emergency, other than in wartime. As the corona virus is a health issue and not a war, Sweden could not impose a state of emergency. In early April the Swedish government tabled a bill in parliament, with the aim of obtaining additional decision-making powers in order to help tackle Covid-19. The ‘emergency powers’ bill was passed on 16^th April and remains in effect until the end of June. However, in comparison to emergency powers bills in other countries, it has many limitations. For example, it does not give the government the power to quarantine the whole population, nor restrict their ability to go outside. Measures can implemented by the government and be placed into effect immediately, but these will still be sent to parliament for review, and if these are not approved by the majority, they will then be revoked.

However, in Norway a ‘coronavirus law’ was introduced on 12^th March, despite there being no deaths in the country at that point. This meant the government could close both public and private institutions such as schools and universities. Similarly to many other European countries, Norway have also told citizens to stay at home and observe the two metres social distancing rule. This also prevented people from staying in their second homes. From a Norwegian perspective, this has a severe impact on their way of life as it is an important Norwegian custom to own a ‘hytte’ for holidays. On 19^th March the government announced they had drafted an Emergency Powers Bill. This had been prepared without the usual public discussion and input. Agreement was reached with the opposition to pass the bill with no debate. This prompted storms of protest from many people who believed this to be undemocratic and bypassing their usual parliamentary procedures. It was agreed that MPs can intervene if one third of them oppose the rules and in any event the bill will expire on 31^st December 2020.

Given that the differing political arrangements have influenced the approach to tackling Covid-19, it will be interesting to see what impact the outcome will have on these going forward.