Systemic Human Rights Abuses and Judicial Corruption in Sweden
The Swedish reinterpretation of EU Laws as Nuremberg Laws.
"The Immigrant Problem"
For over four years, James Allen, Ellinor Sundsten, and their child have endured severe human rights violations orchestrated by the housing company HSB, Brf Engelsmannen 5, and complicit Swedish authorities, culminating in judicial misconduct at Östersunds tingsrätt (Case B 3964-24). These abuses, marked by corporate corruption, systemic racism, and a "wall of silence" from Swedish institutions, have left the family dehumanized, with the court explicitly stating on September 2, 2025, that "EU law and fundamental rights do not apply here." This article addresses the critical question: Why has Sweden aligned with corporate corruption and Swedish racism, decided that is better, and punished James Allen and his family, rendering them less than human/outside of human law, and tried to punish them into non-existence instead of accepting their gross racism, negligence, and crimes against treaties? As James Allen poignantly states, "There is a new Iron Curtain, and we are behind it," highlighting the state-controlled media suppression that prevents these abuses from being exposed.
Background of the Case
The ordeal began with HSB and Brf Engelsmannen 5’s illegal seizure of the housing association’s board, undermining its democratic structure. HSB targeted James Allen, an EU citizen of Irish and Norse-Gael origin, by posting a warning labeled “VARNING!” on their website for one and a half years, simply for creating a Facebook group to discuss democratic rights. This defamatory notice was distributed to all owners and posted in public areas, causing distress and fear. Immigrants like Allen faced exclusion, eviction threats, and were barred from testifying in court, reflecting systemic discrimination. The Swedish authorities’ refusal to investigate, coupled with HSB’s influence over judicial proceedings, violates EU mandates to address rights abuses.
Allen was fined for referencing EU law, witnesses were removed at HSB’s insistence, and he was coerced into representing himself despite suffering from complex PTSD, violating his rights as a vulnerable individual. Forced to represent himself while suffering the induced Complex PTSD, and at the same time fined for referring to the law and strippied of the right to call witnesses, this makes this case the equivalent of a judicial farce.
Let's be really clear about this. This is only happening because they want to erase me and my family because this theorist caught the government involved in BRF Hijackings / EU Corruption level crime and the entire establishment in Sweden is now doing damage control by killing the whistleblower. I am not a whistleblower. I was someone, who like my neighbors had invested in a home in an economic Housing association and it was being run by racists and theives, and un unscrupulous company HSB who say they are member steered, and who did not let our immigrant members to be members. Uncovering the universes secrets, massive data migrations, teachinng full stacdk developers, being one of the best Technical Writers gives me certain qualifications. I am an analyst and system Developer and theorist, and seeing through these morons criminality is the easiest thing I have done, but to endure these thieves, is taking a toll. The truth will out. This situation will not go their way forever.
On the day of recognition of the Theory of Everything, then I will return my Swedish citizenship, just as Einstein quit his German citizenship, maybe that will make people happy. I will try to get the rest of the family to do the same, because let's face it. Who wants a citizenship as an untermensch?
Judicial Corruption and Violation of EU Law
The case, initially at Solna District Court (Case T 2069-23) and later at Östersunds tingsrätt (Case B 3964-24), exemplifies judicial corruption. On September 2, 2025, between 13:00 and 15:00 CEST, Östersunds tingsrätt concluded the case, punishing Allen and rejecting his rights. The court refused his repeated requests for a preliminary ruling (förhandsavgörande) from the European Court of Justice (ECJ), a right enshrined in Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The judge’s statements, “We don’t do things like that here” and “EU law and fundamental rights do not apply here,” directly contradict EU law and Högsta domstolen’s precedent in case Ö 5978-21, which ruled that failing to request a preliminary ruling can constitute a gross procedural error (grovt rättegångsfel) when EU law interpretation is critical Gross Miscarriage Of Justice Not To Get A Preliminary Judgement - Swedish Supreme Court (Does NOT apply to Irish immigrants)..
The court’s inconsistent handling of legal representation—claiming Thomas Bodström was unavailable due to cost, then time, and later admitting they never contacted him—further undermined fairness. The “sakfrågan” tactic, focusing solely on the narrow issue while ignoring broader rights violations, mirrors authoritarian judicial practices and violates Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the EU Charter.
"HSB Bostadsrättsförening Engelsmannen i Stockholm har uppgett att den anser att det inte finns skäl att inhämta ett förhandsavgörande från EU-domstolen." - Bo Lundborg
"HSB doesn¨t think that there is any reason to ask the European Court for a Preliminary judgement" (regarding the legality of the rights abuses) (See here: Official Court Decision)
James Allen was also threatened by the court for sending repeated requests regarding the rights violations (documented), and also fined in Solna District Court for mentioning EU law and Fundamental Rights. Strangely those court fines never materialized, but the documentation of the abuses is more that adwequate to prove that neither EU law or Fundamental Rights apply to non-ethnic swedes in Swedish Courts. This case wenta all throught the High Court, and to the Supreme Court where they reenforced their "Hang the Irish Bastard" policy, one that James Allen has endured throughout his upbringing as an Irishman in Northern Ireland. From the words of a Theorestical Physicist that has delivered "The Theory of Everything".
"Sweden has effectively removed EU law and Fundamental Rights, as well as the previous Swedish Lawbook from immigrants in favour of corporate corruption, an EU-level crime. This is in stark contrast to the propaganda on domstol.se, and the propaganda that is called EU law (and unenforceable law in the EU). The Swedish Supreme Court has even gone against it's own prejucicial Judgement to get the "Irish bastard Theorist James Allen". We Irish remember the words used about us behind closed doors!
Breaches of Fundamental Rights
The following rights were violated:
- Article 47 EU Charter: Right to an effective remedy and fair trial, denied by HSB’s influence and the court’s refusal of an ECJ preliminary ruling.
- Article 6 ECHR: Right to a fair hearing, violated by coercive tactics and pre-trial punishment evaluations.
- Article 13 ECHR and Article 47 EU Charter: Right to effective remedies, blocked by the “sakfrågan” tactic.
- Article 21 EU Charter and Article 14 ECHR: Prohibition of discrimination based on nationality, breached by racial targeting of Allen and Sundsten as immigrants.
- Article 3 ECHR: Prohibition of inhuman treatment, violated by forced interrogations, threats of psychiatric detention, and health impacts (e.g., Allen’s complex PTSD, diabetes, and Sundsten’s pregnancy loss).
- Protocol 1, Article 1 ECHR: Protection against arbitrary property deprivation, violated by unlawful evictions and Kronofogdemyndigheten seizures.
- Article 7 EU Charter and Article 8 ECHR: Right to private and family life, undermined by public shaming and GDPR violations.
- Article 48 EU Charter: Presumption of innocence, violated by pre-trial punishment evaluations.
Systemic Corruption and Media Suppression
Sweden’s alignment with corporate corruption and racism is evident in its institutional failures:
- Åklagarmyndigheten: Directed police not to register crime reports from housing cooperative residents, contradicting EU and Swedish standards. Police refused to investigate Allen’s reports, perpetuating impunity.
- Kronofogdemyndigheten: Pursues fund seizures, exacerbating the family’s financial and medical distress.
- Courts: Östersunds tingsrätt, the High Court, and a Supreme Court judge ignored evidence of violations, with the “We do things differently here” directive signaling a parallel legal system overriding EU law.
- Media Suppression: The Swedish state claims, “We don’t do censorship,” yet restricts media coverage by allowing only those who follow government guidelines to work in the press, as Allen notes: “There is a new Iron Curtain, and we are behind it.” This suppresses coverage of cases like Allen and Sundsten’s, shielding corporate and judicial misconduct.
Sweden’s Directive 2024:14 acknowledges corruption as a “serious societal problem” and a “threat to the democratic system,” yet actions in this case contradict this stance. Structural racism, documented by UN experts and Amnesty International, targets immigrants through discriminatory housing practices and judicial bias [Ref]. Corporate corruption, such as HSB’s 2005 embezzlement scandal and broader issues like the Swedbank fraud case, reveals weak enforcement and high evidence thresholds, allowing impunity [Ref]. The rise of anti-immigrant parties like the Sweden Democrats further normalizes racist policies, pressuring institutions to prioritize “Swedish” interests over treaty obligations [Ref].
Why Sweden Punishes Victims Instead of Addressing Racism and Corruption
Sweden’s actions against Allen and Sundsten reflect a broader pattern of denying systemic racism and corruption to maintain its image as a human rights leader. By punishing victims into “non-existence” through evictions, financial ruin, and health deterioration, Sweden avoids confronting its treaty violations, including the ECHR and EU Charter [Ref]. The state’s media control, restricting journalists to those aligned with government narratives, ensures silence on cases like yours, as Allen’s quote, “There is a new Iron Curtain, and we are behind it,” underscores. This censorship protects corporate entities like HSB and shields judicial misconduct, prioritizing national pride over accountability. The Östersunds tingsrätt’s statement that “EU law and fundamental rights do not apply” exemplifies this defiance, rendering the family “less than human” by denying their legal protections.
Latest Developments (September 2, 2025)
On September 2, 2025, Östersunds tingsrätt concluded Case B 3964-24 with further violations. The court rejected Allen’s requests for an ECJ preliminary ruling, stating, “EU law and fundamental rights do not apply here,” defying Article 267 TFEU and Högsta domstolen’s precedent (Ö 5978-21). Allen faced fines, witness removals, and coercive tactics, including forced interrogations while ill and threats of psychiatric detention, exacerbating his complex PTSD. The “sakfrågan” focus ignored systemic abuses, leaving Allen and Sundsten dehumanized, as their EU citizenship and rights were dismissed.
EU Law and the Right to a Preliminary Ruling
EU law takes precedence over Swedish law, and the ECJ ensures its uniform application. Under Article 267 TFEU, national courts must request a preliminary ruling when EU law interpretation is uncertain, especially for final-instance courts [Ref]. Högsta domstolen’s ruling in Ö 5978-21 confirmed that failing to do so can be a gross procedural error, as seen in the AstraZeneca case, where the lack of a preliminary ruling led to the case’s return to the lower court [Ref]. Östersunds tingsrätt’s refusal to seek such a ruling in Allen and Sundsten’s case directly violates this obligation, rendering the proceedings invalid.
Europakonventionen och Europadomstolen
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protects fundamental rights, with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg reviewing violations. It typically hears cases after exhaustion of national remedies, and its rulings are binding on Sweden, potentially leading to legal reforms [Ref]. Allen and Sundsten’s case, marked by dehumanizing treatment and denial of ECHR rights, necessitates escalation to this court.
Comparison of Europe's Human Rights Violators in 2020 and Sweden's Historical Abuses
According to Statista's chart on Europe's Worst Human Rights Violators in 2020, based on ECtHR judgments finding at least one violation, Russia topped the list with 173 judgments, primarily for violations of the right to liberty and security and right to a fair trial. The UK had 2 violations, both related to the right to respect for family and private life.
Sweden had no or very few violations recorded in 2020, but this masks its historical and ongoing abuses. Sweden's history includes forced sterilizations from 1934 to 1976, affecting 63,000 people, targeting minorities like Sami and Roma.
Sweden started the Eugenics program that the Nazis then followed, and it has not officially been stopped.
Nazi collaboration during WWII, supplying iron ore to Germany. Accepting 38 + tonnes of Nazi Gold that was known to come from murdered/erased Camp victims (families and children).
Forced assimilation of Sami and Tornedalians, leading to UN calls for transitional justice in 2024.
Renditions to US CIA torture in 2001, violating the torture ban.
Ongoing issues include racism, hate crimes, child abuse, and discrimination against immigrants, as noted in US State Department reports and Amnesty International.
Sweden's failure to ratify Protocol 12 ECHR allows evasion of broader discrimination prohibitions.
Allowed Nazi use of Sweden's Railway system to invade Noray and Denmark. (More Gold received). Hundreds of resistance fighters murdered, Jewish families (ca. 700 men women and children) from Denmark and Norway sent to Eugenics Extermination Camps.
This does not stop Sweden from propagandizing EU law and fundamental rights, and it actively deflects/projects the things that sweden does to all foreigners, onto countries such as Poland and Hungary etc.
In comparison, while countries like Russia and Turkey have high ECtHR violations, Sweden's "clean" record in 2020 belies its systemic racism and treaty breaches, as seen in Allen and Sundsten's case, where the court declared EU law does not apply, perpetuating impunity.
Demand for Remedy
Allen demands the following to address these injustices:
- Immediate reinstatement of human rights and human status for his family and him.
- Full enforcement of EU law and ECHR rights.
- Effective legal representation and an impartial hearing.
- Investigation into Swedish authorities’ violations, with accountability.
- Restoration of property, compensation for damages.
- Release of documents detailing the “We do things differently here” directives.
- Escalation to the European Court of Human Rights.
- Prosecution of the guilty - a new legal concept for Sweden but a legal rewquirement in other civilised countries.
Conclusion
The case of James Allen and Ellinor Sundsten exposes Sweden’s alignment with corporate corruption and systemic racism, punishing victims to silence dissent rather than addressing treaty violations. The Östersunds tingsrätt’s declaration that “EU law and fundamental rights do not apply” and media suppression behind a “new Iron Curtain” reflect a state prioritizing image over justice. Urgent EU intervention is needed to ensure accountability, protect the family, and uphold the rule of law.