4
LEANDER v. SWEDEN JUGDMENT
12. It appears that on 25 September the Director informed him that the
outcome of the personnel control had been unfavourable and that he could
therefore not be employed at the Museum.
13. Following the advice of the Security Chief of the Naval Base, the
applicant wrote to the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy (chefen för
marinen) requesting to be informed of the reasons why he could not be
employed at the Naval Museum.
In his reply of 3 October 1979, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy
stated, inter alia:
"The Museum possesses several storage rooms and historical objects within the area
for the security of which the Chief of the Naval Base (örlogsbaschefen) is responsible.
According to the information received by the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, the
person holding the post in question must have freedom to circulate within areas
subject to special restrictions regarding access. The rules on access to these areas must
therefore also be applied to the personnel employed at the Museum.
It is for these reasons that the Chief of the Naval Base requested a personnel control.
The control carried out has provided such grounds for the Commander-in-Chief’s
assessment of you from a security point of view that the decision has been taken not to
accept you.
However, if your duties at the Naval Museum will not necessitate that you have
access to the naval installations at the Naval Base, the Commander-in-Chief sees no
reason to oppose your employment. The decision whether or not to employ you is
taken in a procedure distinct from the present one."
14. On 22 October 1979, the applicant complained to the Government
and requested that the assessment of the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy
be cancelled and that he be declared acceptable for the temporary
employment at the Naval Museum, irrespective of the possibility of being
reinstated in that employment. He pointed out in particular that he had left a
permanent position in Dalarna, in the North of Sweden, on being told that
he was accepted for employment at the Naval Museum and that a negative
outcome of the personnel control could mean social misery, especially
considering that he had a wife and child to support. In his original
complaint, and also in a letter of 4 December 1979, Mr. Leander further
requested that he be given information about the reasons for his not being
accepted at the Naval Museum.
The Government requested the opinion of the Supreme Commander of
the Armed Forces (överbefälhavaren), who in turn consulted the
Commander-in-Chief of the Navy.
The Commander-in-Chief of the Navy explained in a letter of 7
November 1979 that he had received the result of the personnel control from
the Supreme Commander on 17 September 1979 together with the
following proposal: