Page:The Constitution of Sweden (2016).pdf/17

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IN SWEDEN the other hand, the Commission could not agree on two crucial political questions, namely the bicameral system and the electoral system. The majority wished to adopt a unicameral system and a combination of personal preference voting and party voting. These disagreements meant that the Commission’s proposals could not serve as the basis for a total reform of the Constitution.

A second all-party inquiry was needed. It was called the Commission on the Fundamental Laws and was appointed in 1966. In the first phase of its work the Commission focused on reaching a settlement with regard to the chamber system and the electoral system and to introduce the principle of parliamentary government explicitly in the old text of the Constitution. The starting point was that, prior to the 1964 election, the non-socialist parties had agreed to recommend a single-chamber Parliament. As the Social Democratic Party suffered great losses in the local elections of 1966 and could thus expect to lose their majority in the First Chamber, they too were converted to the idea of a single chamber. But a precondition for this was that a nationally proportional electoral system was introduced utilising adjustment seats but stipulating a voting threshold of four per cent of the votes throughout the country. A party was required to command this level of electoral support to be represented in the Riksdag. The compromise also included a common election day for parliamentary and local government elections. A three-year electoral period was introduced.

This partial reform of the Constitution was approved by the Riksdag in 1969. Elections to the new unicameral Parliament with 350 members took place in the autumn of 1970. It met for the first time in January 1971. In conjunction with the subsequent total reform of the Constitution, the number of members was reduced to 349. This was done to avoid the situation in which the Riksdag found itself between 1974 and 1976 with an equal number of seats, namely 175, in each of the two blocs of political parties; the socialist and non-socialist.

In the second phase of the work of the Commission on the Fundamental Laws, the objective was to produce a completely new constitution. A number of complicated issues remained unresolved. At a meeting in Torekov in the summer of 1971, the Commission agreed that the monarchy should be retained and that the Head of State should only have representative duties. The Speaker was to submit a proposal for a new Prime Minister to the Riksdag for its approval. For the proposal to be rejected, more than half of the members were required to vote against it.

Another important dispute in the Commission concerned rights and freedoms. The non-socialist parties advocated greater constitutional protection for political rights and freedoms, while the Social Democrats emphasised social rights. In early 1972 the Commission agreed in the name of compromise to lie low regarding this matter. Shortly afterwards the Commission presented its final report with proposals for a new Instrument of Government and a new Riksdag Act.

A government bill proposing a new Instrument of Government and a new Riksdag Act was submitted to the Riksdag in 1973. The proposal was definitively adopted with certain amendments in the following year. 16