The Land Of Black And White

Sweden has been criticized by the EU as one of the worst countries when it comes to dealing with racism and discrimination. Sweden is one of the most reluctant countries and uses minimal resources in working against racism.

Other countries in line with Sweden are Finland, Italy, France, Bulgaria, Hungary and Ireland among European countries which the report says certainly issue more penalty consequences but are too lenient and minimal in punishment.

The report says that these countries have poor and insufficient institutions that can help victims of racism and discrimination fight for their course and justice. Their research suggests that the best country in comparison to them is Britain.

This to most of us is not a surprise. This land of yellow and blue has always been too black and white in dealing with issues of this nature.

In a case where a Kenyan lady Juliet Kavinga was murdered the suspect was set free due to ‘lack of enough’ evidence though the evidence collected could have sent anybody else to a life time prison holiday if the victim was white(read native Swede).

The case made headlines on all Swedish papers after her body was found dumped in a lake but just as easily lost interest after a judge found the suspect, the victim’s former white boyfriend, unanswerable to the charges and frustrated the police in their investigations.

In vice-versa cases, Swedish authorities move mountains in search for justice for one of their own.

In two other cases concerning Kenyans, two well known brothas were sentenced to long terms in prison after their former white girlfriends accused them of rape and assault. In both cases, charges were filed years after the suspected offences and had no physical evidence or enough proof to guarantee convictions.

Even more peculiar, when both Kenyans appealed for justice, they were both slapped with increased penalties in their already overly stretched sentences both in jail terms and fines! In most appeal cases, judgements are normally reconsidered and penalties are reduced.

Another funny twist in these two cases is that the rape charges were dropped! That should automatically mean a reduction in whatever sentence applicable. The lack of concrete evidence, physical, should also have helped reduce the harshness in the judgements. Being first time offenders (as far as I know), even though the charges are very serious should also lead to a fair deduction.

I do not have hard facts about these cases and I don’t mean to claim their innocence though I wish I could, but some justice!

Add these to brutality and harassment by the police and the infamous Swedish door guards. Anybody who has been here long enough can tell several stories where excess force is applied by both the notorious guards and the police. They are afterwards very quick in filing cases of resisting arrest and assaulting an officer to counteract whatever charges you may bring up against them.

In one case, unbelievably, ambulance personnel threw out a victim from the ambulance on his way to the hospital after the guards had landed one too many on him! The police were generous enough to call the ambulance for the at-the-time unconscious Kenyan man but what might they have communicated to the personnel? Too Black and White.

Scared? Time to turn Swedish and be on the right (white) side of the Swedish law system? Think again! Recently a Swedish citizen was stripped off his citizenship as part of his punishment for suspected criminal activities. The Afro-Swedish man who has a Kenyan background (read former Kenyan citizen) got the rude shock which also was to include deportation to Kenyan after a dance with Swedish justice system.

The man who is a friend to many Kenyans is now facing statelessness since he had seized being Kenyan by law when he become an Afro-Swede, a citizenship that many take as green pastures, a shade from the scotching sun, a Canaan.

Who ever issued that judgement must have cast the Swedish law aside and rendered it irrelevant given that; when one adopts a citizenship it is up to the laws of that country to defend his or her rights. No matter the crime, everybody is entitled to equal rights in the land of his citizenship.

This judgement can never apply to a Swedish native but what is the different between the two? None, according to the Swedish constitution which states that this right can never be revoked, but it turns Black and White when the police or a judge takes the law into their hand.

The only difference could apply if the said person had dual-citizenship and was in the country of his first citizenship at the time the suspected crime was committed in that country.

“A granted Swedish citizenship can never be withdrawn even if it was issued under incorrect prerequisite conditions”.

So what law stripes off the Kenyan’s Swedish citizenship and recommends his deportation, Black law? What can lead to an exception of this magnitude? Why can the rights of a citizen, due to his or her origin be different from those of a native citizen?

Njoro