This guide is informational. Always verify how the rules apply to your specific case.
You are here: At work → Public employee
Public employment is built on the principle that citizens should be able to see into the operations. Therefore, you who work there have protection that private employees lack – and that is why managers in municipalities and authorities often react incorrectly when someone uses it. The Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice have for decades criticized municipal managers, principals, and operations managers who “just wanted to have a conversation” with the person who spoke to the newspaper. This guide provides you with the rules so that you can use the protection instead of hoping for it.
Freedom of expression against the boss
The freedom of expression in the Instrument of Government applies against public authorities, and a public employer is a public authority. This means that your boss may not take any action – not even a “clarifying conversation” – against you for publicly criticizing the operations, management, or policy. The Parliamentary Ombudsman has repeatedly stated that even a conversation where the boss questions the employee's statements constitutes an impermissible restriction, as it has a chilling effect on others. The Labour Court has rejected both dismissals (AD 2011 No. 74) and reassignments (AD 2012 No. 25) of public employees who have spoken out in their free time.
The requirement for you is to distinguish between the role of a citizen and the role of an official. As a citizen, you may say what you want. In the exercise of duties, you must be objective and impartial (Chapter 1, Section 9 of the Instrument of Government) and follow the decisions made – you may criticize a decision in the debate but not sabotage it at work. Those who make decisions about individuals should also not express themselves in a way that could question impartiality in those decisions; it is a matter of conflict of interest, not a freedom of expression issue.
The Protection of Whistleblowers – Four Parts
The protection applies when the purpose is publication in a constitutionally protected medium – newspaper, radio, TV, website with a publishing certificate or responsible publisher. A post on your own Facebook account is not covered by the freedom to disclose information (instead, freedom of expression according to the Instrument of Government applies). Providing information to a journalist anonymously is the classic form, but the protection also applies if you provide your name – in that case, it is the prohibition of reprisals that applies.
The Limits
Municipal Companies and Private Contractors
Constitutional protection applies against “the public.” A municipal corporation is a separate legal entity, but the legislator has closed the gap: employees in companies, foundations, and associations where municipalities or regions have legal controlling influence have the same freedom to disclose information, investigation, and reprisal protection as government employees (Chapter 13, Section 2 of the Public Access to Information and Secrecy Act, compare Chapter 2, Section 3). However, freedom of expression according to the Instrument of Government does not fully apply against the company as an employer – there you are closer to the private sector's duty of loyalty for criticism not submitted to the media.
Do you work for a private provider – a healthcare company, an independent school, a care company – that is wholly or partially publicly funded, the Act (2017:151) on whistleblower protection in certain private activities applies: freedom to disclose information, prohibition on investigation, and prohibition on reprisals against the employer, for activities within schools, healthcare, and care. The law does not apply to trade secrets related to business relationships, but it does apply to everything related to the care, education, and care itself. If you are unsure whether your workplace is covered: ask the principal (the municipality or region) in writing if the agreement contains conditions on whistleblower protection – it often does.
Secondary employment
The Public Employment Act distinguishes between three types. Confidence-damaging secondary employment – one that can undermine confidence in your or the authority's impartiality or damage the authority's reputation – is prohibited by law (Section 7 LOA). The employer must inform about what can be confidence-damaging (Section 7 a), may request that you provide information about your secondary employment (Section 7 b), and must decide in writing with justification if you should cease a secondary employment (Section 7 c). Work-impeding and competing secondary employment are regulated in collective agreements (AB for municipalities and regions, conditions agreements for the state) and can be prohibited there. A political assignment is in principle never confidence-damaging for a regular administrator, but it can be for a judge, a police officer in an investigative function, or a manager who decides in matters where the party has interests. If you receive a no: request the decision in writing. State decisions on secondary employment can be tried in court as a labor dispute.
Disciplinary action, suspension, and prosecution
For state employees there is disciplinary responsibility in LOA: warning or salary deduction for service offenses (Sections 14–15), with a requirement for written notification, the right to express yourself, union consultation, and a decision within two years from the offense (Sections 17–19). Suspension from work may occur if there is suspicion of a crime that can lead to dismissal, or when it is necessary for the operation during the investigation of a disciplinary matter (Section 31). Certain authority employees are reported for prosecution for service errors instead of receiving disciplinary action (Section 22). All these decisions can be reviewed in court; the deadlines follow LAS and MBL. In municipalities and regions disciplinary action follows the collective agreement (written warning according to AB), with notification to the union. Read warning and reminder for the difference between an LAS warning and a disciplinary warning.
When the boss calls for a meeting about what you said
Related: politics in the workplace, whistleblowing at work, whistleblower against authority and social media.
Frequently Asked Questions
The boss asked at the APT who talked to the local newspaper. Is that really illegal?
Yes. The prohibition on investigation in Chapter 3, Section 5 of the TF prohibits authorities and public bodies from investigating the person who provided information for publication, and intentional investigation is punishable. An open question at a meeting is an investigation. Note it, bring it up with the union, and consider a JO report.
Can I criticize the board's decision on Facebook?
Yes, as a private individual, with the limits that apply to everyone: confidentiality, defamation, incitement. Your employer may not take action against the opinion. Avoid writing in a job title or in a way that appears as the authority's position, and do not write about individual cases.
I work at a municipal housing company. What applies?
Freedom of communication, prohibition on investigation, and prohibition on reprisals apply (Chapter 13, Section 2 of the OSL). The company is also subject to the principle of public access. However, freedom of expression according to the Instrument of Government does not apply directly against the company as an employer – criticism that does not go through the media is assessed more closely to private sector rules, but with stronger protection for everything related to the public task.
Can I, as a state employee, appeal a decision on secondary employment?
A decision that you must cease secondary employment is a labor dispute that is tried by the court according to the Act on Labor Disputes, after negotiation if you are unionized. Request the decision in writing with justification (Section 7 c of the LOA) – it is a prerequisite.
What is the difference between whistleblower protection and the whistleblower law?
Whistleblower protection is constitutional law, applies only to information given to the media for publication, and covers all subjects. The whistleblower law applies to reporting of public interest misconduct internally, to authorities, or publicly, requires reasonable grounds to believe the information is true, and provides immunity plus protection against reprisals with damages. Use both: report according to the whistleblower law and inform the media with whistleblower protection.
Sources
- Instrument of Government Chapter 1, Section 9, Chapter 2, Section 1
- Freedom of the Press Act Chapter 1, Section 7, Chapter 3, Sections 3–6, Chapter 7, Section 22
- Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression Chapter 1, Section 10
- Public Access to Information and Secrecy Act Chapter 2, Section 3, Chapter 13, Section 2, Chapter 25, Section 18, Chapter 26, Section 15
- Act (2017:151) on Whistleblower Protection in Certain Private Activities
- Public Employment Act (1994:260) Sections 7–7 c, 14–19, 22–23, 31
- Parliamentary Ombudsman
- Chancellor of Justice
The guide is general information about applicable rules, not advice on your case. Collective agreements may deviate from the law on several points. Legal status checked on September 25, 2026.
For those reading under stress
The guide is intended as support when you already have a lot on your mind. You do not need to read everything at once: start with the section that matches where you are today and return when the next step becomes relevant.
Cases with authorities rarely improve by carrying everything alone. Ask for help from a support person, lawyer, or relative if you can—especially before decisions with long-term effects.
Common mistakes that make the case more difficult
- Relying only on verbal promises without brief written confirmation or follow-up email.
- Waiting to request documents until the conflict is already locked—then it becomes harder to show what was said.
- Writing so long and emotionally that the authority stops responding to the substantive issue.
- Missing deadlines for reconsideration or appeal because the decision was not read verbatim.
Mini-checklist before you leave the guide
- Do I have the date, diary/case number, and name of the person handling it (if you know)?
- Do I know what the next step is: respond, request, remind, appeal, or report?
- Have I saved emails and attachments in a place where I can find them in a week?
