A Swedish politician at the center of a major fraud investigation has filed a lawsuit against his former municipal employer. Håkan Malmström is demanding his dismissal from Köping Municipality be overturned. He also seeks substantial compensation for lost wages and damages. This legal action follows his earlier indictment for serious fraud involving public funds. The case raises immediate questions about accountability and the use of taxpayer money within local Swedish government structures.
The fraud charges allege Malmström received approximately 430,000 Swedish kronor in unjustified income loss compensation. The payments originated from Västerås City and Region Västmanland. Authorities claim he was not entitled to these substantial public funds. The indictment details a systematic process of claiming payments for which there was no legitimate basis. This type of case typically undergoes rigorous review by both the Swedish Prosecution Authority and the relevant municipal auditors.
Köping Municipality dismissed Malmström from his teaching position in April. The grounds for termination were repeated unauthorized absences from his duties. Municipal officials stated he failed to apply for leave or register his absence in the payroll system. This is a standard requirement under Sweden's public sector employment agreements. The dismissal process is governed by the Employment Protection Act, known as LAS, which the politician now claims was violated.
In his lawsuit filed with the district court, Malmström presents a counter-narrative. He argues he properly informed his employer about absences related to political duties. He seeks a court order to nullify the dismissal. His financial demands include 200,000 kronor in damages plus full compensation for all lost salary. The case will test the boundaries between political activity and public employment obligations. Legal experts note such conflicts are not uncommon but rarely reach this level of financial and legal severity.
The broader implications touch on Swedish government policy regarding integrity in public office. The Riksdag has repeatedly strengthened rules on transparency and conflict of interest. This case emerges as Swedish Parliament committees discuss further amendments to local government ethics codes. A ruling against the municipality could influence future personnel decisions across all Swedish government districts. A ruling for the municipality would reinforce employer rights to discipline staff for absenteeism, even for political reasons.
Malmström has declined to comment on the ongoing legal proceedings. This is a standard legal strategy in Sweden during active court cases and police investigations. The silence leaves many questions unanswered about the timeline and specifics of the fraud allegations. The municipality is expected to file a formal response to the lawsuit in the coming weeks. The district court will then set a date for preliminary hearings, a process that can take several months.
This situation highlights the complex interplay between local Swedish politics and public administration. Municipal employees who also hold elected office must navigate strict dual-role regulations. The case unfolds against a backdrop of heightened public scrutiny over the use of regional and municipal funds. Final Riksdag decisions on related integrity laws could be informed by the outcome of this litigation. The resolution will be closely watched in political circles within Stockholm and across other government districts.