Talk:Basic Laws of Sweden

Uncodified constitution

I removed the notion that Sweden has an uncodified constitution. With all due respect to the (British) source cited, the general understanding over here is that the country has a written constitution consisting of four documents, precisely as detailed in this article. The fact that this constitutional order is further extended by a mix of written sources and unwritten constitutional culture is much more similar to countries like (say) Germany or the United States than to the less codified constitutional order of the United Kingdom. Please see my edit and talk post from some minutes ago at the article Uncodified constitution, and sources quoted there. --HAdG (talk) 14:16, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguating

This needs disambiguating - the UK has an Act of Succession as well, to name but one. PML. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.202.5.75 (talk • contribs) 2003-04-15

Church

Since the Swedish church is no longer a state church it seems awfully odd to use a headline called Luthern State Church. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.5.62 (talk • contribs) 2006-11-19

Also it contains factual errors, I for one was born 1984 but not into the church even as my parents was part of the church. Zorbeltuss (talk) 06:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Never heard of "Luthern" anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.217.156.151 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Erroneous

Sweden does not have a 'constitution' per se. Title of article needs to be changed. - Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.217.156.151 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

No. A late reply, but just to set the record straight, for anyone who might be confused about this: It may not be called a "constitution" (Swedish: konstitution) in Swedish, but the four Fundamental Laws are more often than not collectively called "grundlagar" in Swedish, which translates to "constitutional laws", and I think it's a widely accepted fact that they, together with the Riksdag Act, form the "Constitution of Sweden". If this wasn't true, then why does the Riksdag have a page on the constitution? The end. Gavleson (talk) 17:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

The end? You didn't answer your own question. Constitution might be the word that best translates the concept, but the makeup of the Swedish constitution and that of other nations are widely different.

Germany also calls theirs a 'basic law', and it translates as basic law. This article should be moved to Basic Law of Sweden and this page changed to redirect to it. Hentheden (talk) 14:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

NOTA BENE: Very important inter-national issue and article.

The article definetly needs to display that swedes, many Swedes, living in Sweden, live under the supposition that their four "grundlagar" is their, and Swedens constitution. Probably a constitution in Swedish should rather be called "nationalstadgar"; national statues; for more swedish people to fuller understand what they are, what their function is in a nation; national jurisdiction, and how people with a broader international political experience can find the formal fondation of Sweden somewhat hazy to say the least. CS 18:16, 3 September 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSjoholm (talk • contribs)

The lengthier Swedish version of the article contains a short paragraph on why they might sometimes be called the constitution informally, even though they are not. Furthermore, the wiki page on the similar document that has a similar role in the governing of Germany is also called Basic Law rather than constitution. Hentheden (talk) 14:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

This is so called uncodified constitution. The same there is for instance in Israel or UK: Basic Laws of Israel or Constitution of the United Kingdom. --Nearman (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Instrument of Government

In the section Instrument of Government the following unsourced text appears: "After over fifty years of de facto parliamentarism, it was written into the Instrument of Government of 1974...". An explanation is needed as to how a state could have a de facto legislative situation, that obviously was not caused by war or occupation. The reader might be wondering how a state can be governed in a different way than what the law prescribes. 94.191.156.32 (talk) 09:58, 17 April 2020 (UTC)