Published 3 April 2023 at 12.13
Domestic. The Security and Privacy Protection Board has reviewed the police's high-profile clan report, which passes the review with a couple of minor remarks.
Share the article
TwittraShare
The police's clan report
- KD's clan politicians in the Riksdag report the police's report
- Clan criminal killers get protected identity by the Swedish state
- Police: Mosques in Sweden are controlled by clan criminals
- Secret report: Immigrant cops work for criminal clans
- FULL LIST: Here are all the criminal clans in Sweden
The police's report “Family-based criminal networks in Sweden” came out in January 2020 and included, among other things, a list of known criminal immigrant clans in Sweden.
Fria Tider took part in the report and was the only media to publish the list in its entirety:
FULL LIST: Here are all the criminal clans in Sweden https://t.co/ABpczKbRTg
— Fria Tider (@friatider) September 24, 2020
The Security and Privacy Board's review has covered partly the police intelligence case, and partly the Noa report that the intelligence case resulted in.
The review has shown that the Police Authority's processing of personal data in the intelligence case, to which only one person had access, has essentially been without remark. However, the board assesses that the Police Authority in three of the folders in the intelligence case has processed personal data for a purpose other than that intended by the intelligence case.
“The data cannot therefore be considered to have been adequate and relevant in relation to the purpose of the processing and should therefore not have been processed in the intelligence case. This means that more personal data than was necessary has been processed in the intelligence case. This has constituted incorrect processing. The board notes, however, that the intelligence matter is now closed and that all personal data processing has ceased,” writes the committee.
The review has further shown that the processing of personal data in the clan report itself in reviewed parts has been legal. However, the board believes that the Police Authority's designation of family-based criminal networks as “the family/family [last name]” in the report has in some cases been inappropriate. According to the board, such a name risks being able to negatively affect even people who are not part of the family-based criminal network but well in the family/relatives with the same surname, especially if the spread is large as in the case of the Noa report.
” The police authority should therefore have used a different way of expression. However, it can be stated that, after the NOA report was completed, the police authority has developed a special methodological support for family-based criminal networks and, among other things, introduced a national nomenclature/standard for how such network must be named in the intelligence activities, which the board views positively. The board therefore assumes that the Police Authority, to the extent possible, carries out record-keeping efforts regarding the NOA report to ensure that the new routines are followed,” writes the board.