news

According to whistleblower cops, the police manipulate cases in several ways: pressuring victims not to file reports, misclassifying serious crimes as minor offenses, delaying evidence collection until surveillance footage expires, and conducting superficial or non-existent witness interviews. These tactics allow police departments to appear more efficient while quietly discarding cases that require real investigative work.

One officer, Martin Bjørnvig, has publicly admitted that he and his colleagues routinely deceive the public. "We violate citizens' legal rights by failing to investigate reported cases. And we lie to citizens about the reasons," he told Danish state media. He told how he was tasked with processing a large backlog of cases involving economic crime save was instructed to close cases, even if there were named suspects or fraud for large amounts. An anonymous ex-cop admitted to having "washed" assault andremoved cases.

Other officers, speaking anonymously, confirm that leadership not only tolerates but actively encourages this practice. One states: "You have no choice. Management decides. In the end, you’re just a number with an attractive detective job"

The motivations behind this fraud are clear. On an individual level, officers seek to meet internal performance metrics while avoiding complex, time-consuming cases. As an institution, the police force prioritizes bureaucratic efficiency over justice, preferring tidy statistics over meaningful law enforcement.

Despite overwhelming testimony from rank-and-file officers, senior police leadership denies everything. The National Police has flatly rejected the existence of "washing," dismissing the accusations as mere "prioritization." Yet officers describe an environment where questioning these methods leads to professional retaliation, confirming that the deception is systemic.

The Liberal Party, one of three parties making up the Nordic hermit kingdom's Social Democrat-led right-wing regime, has reacted to the scandal not by demanding accountability but by pulling out an old reactionary hobby horse and demanding more money for the police. The party’s justice spokesperson, Preben Bang Henriksen, called the revelations "deeply troubling" but framed the issue as a lack of police resources rather than a structural failure of law enforcement itself.

The government, eager to maintain its pro-police "law and order" stance, has signaled no intention of holding the police accountable. Instead, it continues to lavish funding on both law enforcement and the military, while slashing education, healthcare, and social services. This demonstrates the regime’s true priorities: protecting the state’s coercive apparatus while neglecting the well-being of ordinary citizens.

The Danish "washing" scandal is yet another reminder that, under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the claim that police exist to "protect and serve" is a lie. The police exist to uphold the existing social order, ensuring that the state’s priorities—not justice—are enforced. Any protection the public receives is incidental; their real purpose is to maintain control.

• Source: DR (state media), March 23rd 2025

In its quest to become a ‘normal’, ‘acceptable’ party, Die Linke has joined the warmongering radical centrists in their rearmament folly

This past week was one for the history books. The German parliament amended the constitutional debt brake so as to enable unlimited military spending, irrespectively of how deeply into the red it will push the federal government’s budget. Meanwhile, none of that fiscal generosity is to be extended to investment in hospitals, education, firefighters, kindergartens, pensions, green technologies etc. In brief, when it comes to funding life, austerity remains part of Germany’s constitutional order. Only investments in death have been released from austerity’s constitutional clutches.

The underlying reason for introducing this stunning change to Germany’s constitution is simple: German automakers are now too uncompetitive. They can’t profitably sell their cars to civilians in Germany or abroad. So, they demand that the German state buys tanks that Rheinmetall will be making on Volkswagen’s disused production lines. To get the state to pay for this, the constitutional brake of government deficits had to be bypassed. Always eager to serve their Big Business masters, parties of permanent centrist governments were deployed to usher in this cynical constitutional change, one that annuls Germany’s post-war commitment to peace and disarmament.

To change the constitution, the centrist parties needed a two-thirds majority in both houses of Germany’s federal parliament: the lower house, the Bundestag, but also the upper chamber, the Bundesrat where each state is represented by its size and via the coalition state government ruling over it. While the centrist parties secured their two-thirds majority in the outgoing Bundestag, they faced a serious problem in the Bundesrat. Die Linke, the “left Party”, whom we congratulated for their good election result recently, had the opportunity to cause the state governments in which it was party to (as part of a state-level coalition) to abstain in the Bundesrat vote. That would have blocked the constitutional amendment and would have dealt a lethal blow to military Keynesianism’s insidious return. Alas, the leadership of Die Linke chose not to use their power, their vote in the Bundesrat, to do this. They, in short, joined the warmongering radical centrists in their dangerous, extremely costly rearmament folly.

The voters of Die Linke are, rightly, enraged, with some of them even calling for breaking up the state coalitions in which the party participates and expelling the officials involved. Already Die Linke’s failure to rise up against the genocide in Palestine, and the subsequent totalitarian treatment by the German state of those protesting the genocide, has tarnished Die Linke in the eyes of progressives not just in Germany but beyond too.

Nothing obliterates the ethical standing of a political party of the left more efficiently than a leadership overly keen to be ‘accepted’ by a radicalised centre constantly moving towards the xenophobic, warmongering ultra-right. It was terrible enough that the leaders of Die Linke felt the need to turn a blind eye to Israel’ genocidal apartheid project. Now, this week, they have taken the next step to political oblivion: they have used their votes in the Bundesrat to ensconce, for the first time since 1945, military Keynesianism in the German constitution.

Good night Die Linke. And good luck.