DN reported on Wednesday about an official who, until recently, worked in one of the Government Offices' most security-sensitive activities, with assignments close to the Prime Minister's national security advisor Niclas Kvarnström.
The person failed their security clearance, but was still able to access classified information and use secret IT systems.
Just over a month after the announcement of the security clearance, the employee was found dead in his home. The person had taken his own life.
Anna Steen, chairman of the board of Saco-S, one of the trade unions that organize civil servants at the Government Office, reacts strongly to what happened. She says that the employer has a great deal of responsibility for how employees are taken care of after a negative safety notice.
- What has happened is terrible. It just can't happen, she says.
The trade union ST also reacts strongly to the information.
- This has not been handled well enough. The employee has not been taken care of properly. It also becomes deeply problematic because you are unable to protect the information worth protecting correctly, says Britta Lejon, chairman of ST.
The Government Office has reported the death to the Work Environment Agency. According to DN's information, the report was made against the background that the Government Offices judged that the conditions surrounding the security assessment could be significant for what happened.
- I expect that the Government Office will now acquire routines for how to handle situations like this in a humane way and not just legally. I really hope you learn from this. It's about a person who needs to be taken care of, says Anna Steen.
It is not the first time that a death has befallen the Government Office under high profile circumstances. In May 2025, a high-ranking diplomat at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was arrested by the Security Police on suspicion of espionage. He was released after a few days, but the suspicions remained. Later, the diplomat was found dead in his home.
For people who work in security-sensitive operations, a negative security notice can have far-reaching consequences. In a letter submitted to DN's journalists, the official directs harsh criticism at the Government Offices' security organization and that he considered himself wrongly assessed while at the same time being able to maintain access to security-sensitive information and equipment.
According to the Security Protection Act, persons who participate in security-sensitive activities must undergo a security assessment. The aim is to assess their loyalty, reliability and possible vulnerabilities from a security point of view.
Those who fail a security assessment today have no opportunity to appeal the decision in the security matter. At the same time, such a notification can mean that the person is no longer allowed to perform their duties or loses their job.
Anna Steen at Saco-S believes that this means major legal certainty problems, while the individual employee rarely receives any justification for the decision.
- This uncertainty, not knowing what is causing you to no longer be approved, is very stressful. After all, it can also be a vulnerability that does not lie with myself, but with someone close to me that I do not know or can do anything about.
The information behind a security clearance is subject to confidentiality. Isn't it reasonable that the person who fails can't always be told why?
- Absolutely. It's a catch 22. We have no desire that what should be confidential should not be. But we have to find a safe legal solution when a situation like this arises for an individual.
