For two years, the Municipality of Skellefteå decided not to release Lex Sarah reports, even though in 2012, a court against a particular case against Skellefteå ruled that the reports were public documents.

- We reacted and experienced it as a court battle. The fact that we as news agencies and authorities have different opinions about what information should be public is very common, but that a municipality contradicts a judgment in court quite suddenly without having any new arguments as to why has not happened either sooner or later what I know , says Ulf Fahlén, editor-in-chief of the news agency Siren.

- For us, this was never about not wanting to disclose public documents, but about wanting to have it tested more precisely when in the process a document is perceived as general, says Skellefteå municipality's administrative lawyer Jenny Forsell.

Want to present a more complete picture

When a Lex Sarah report is written, an investigation starts, which usually ends in a week. Skellefteå municipality wanted to have the opportunity to submit a report and report at the same time.

- Through the investigation, the media and the general public get a more complete and objective picture of what actually happened, what deficiencies have emerged and what measures have been taken, so it is not a matter of trying to darken or beautify reality, says Jenny Forsell.

She explains that the municipality's ambition is to try to secure the employees who will write the Lex Sarah reports, perhaps often under stress. But there are arguments that do not hold according to the news agency Siren, which monitors about 500 authorities and handles about 3,000 public documents every day.

- I can understand that there are individual employees who think it is uncomfortable that things that are reported become a news item in the media, but it is something that the municipality must handle in some other way because this is a constitution that has a purpose and I think it is serious that the municipality's lawyer does not seem to have understood the principle of publicity, says Ulf Fahlén.

"Available for everyone to view"

According to him, it is important to understand that the principle of publicity is about anyone being able to scrutinize as much public activity as possible, and not about arranging documents for the media.

- It is clear, for example, that Lex Sarah reports can be difficult to understand for the media and lead to misunderstandings, but it has nothing to do with the matter, because it should never be an argument when we talk about this constitution.

The idea of ​​the municipality was really to appeal further to get a guiding precedent that could change the interpretation of when in time a Lex-Sarah report becomes public action. After strong reactions from politicians and the general public, however, they were let go.

- With the commitment that was aroused, we saw no profit in appealing but chose to continue following the 2012 judgment, notes Jenny Forsell.

At the Siren news agency, employees see that it is generally more difficult to get public documents today compared to before.

- It is being questioned more and we have to work a little harder, and the legislation that comes with it almost always involves additional information being covered by confidentiality and it is bad for the public policy principle does not exist for the media. It exists so that everyone can review how our shared resources are used, says Ulf Fahlén.