DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17993773
title: When Oversight Oversees Itself: Organizational Capture of Mandated Accountability Systems

description: This dataset provides comprehensive empirical evidence documenting the systematic failure of Sweden's police whistleblower function (established July 17, 2022) to perform its mandated accountability role. The research combines quantitative analysis of all 102 whistleblower complaints filed in 2024 with longitudinal governance indicators (IPRI 2007-2025) to demonstrate a critical macro-micro paradox: Sweden ranks #6 globally (top 4.8%) on institutional quality metrics while internal accountability mechanisms operate as gatekeeping systems protecting organizational leadership.

Key Findings

Rejection Rate: 90% of whistleblower complaints dismissed as "lacking public interest" despite covering systematic rule violations, nepotism, false governmental reporting, and retaliation against employees.

Institutional Decline: During the whistleblower era (2022-2024), Sweden's IPRI declined 4.9%, Rule of Law declined 3.8%, falling from #1 to #3 among Nordic countries.

Statistical Significance: Rule of Law shows statistically significant linear decline (p=0.006) at -0.030 points/year since 2017, with whistleblower function establishment failing to arrest negative trends.

Utilization Collapse: 0.3% employee utilization rate (2.9 complaints/1,000 employees), declining to 2.6/1,000 in 2025 despite intensifying organizational dysfunction coverage.

Dataset Contents





IPRI- 2007 - 2025 data[25].xlsx: Full International Property Rights Index dataset (125 countries, 19 years)




sweden_ipri_timeseries.csv: Sweden's governance indicators 2007-2025 (IPRI, Rule of Law, Corruption, Judicial Independence, Political Stability)




nordic_comparison_2024.csv: Comparative analysis of 5 Nordic countries on key governance dimensions




ipri_analysis_results.csv: Summary statistics including Sweden's global ranking, z-scores, decline rates, and trend analysis




sweden_ipri_comprehensive_analysis.png: Four-panel visualization showing (1) Nordic IPRI comparison with whistleblower era highlighted, (2) Sweden's Rule of Law decline with trend line, (3) Component breakdown 2022-2025, (4) Global rankings top 15




Oversight.ipynb: Complete Jupyter notebook with reproducible Python analysis code for all statistical calculations, trend analysis, visualizations, and comparative assessments




Visselblåsarrapport visselblåsarfunktionen m.m..pdf: Full Swedish-language whistleblower report (55 pages) documenting systematic dysfunction through detailed case analysis of all 102 complaints, including redaction patterns, bureaucratic absorption mechanisms, retaliation exposure, and information control strategies



Methodological Approach

Quantitative Analysis: Freedom of Information requests obtained all 102 whistleblower complaints filed in 2024 (January-December), analyzed for disposition patterns, redaction strategies, processing timelines, and outcomes.

Comparative Institutional Analysis: Examination of identical documents released by whistleblower function vs. Special Investigations revealed systematic over-redaction of organizationally embarrassing content beyond legal privacy requirements.

Longitudinal Trend Analysis: IPRI data (2007-2025) provides 19-year governance trajectory, enabling pre/post comparison around whistleblower function establishment and linear regression analysis of persistent decline.

Cross-National Benchmarking: Sweden's performance compared to 124 countries globally and 4 Nordic peers specifically, contextualized against international whistleblower system utilization rates.

Theoretical Contribution

This research reveals a fundamental blind spot in comparative governance measurement. International indices (IPRI, V-Dem, World Justice Project) measure the existence of accountability mechanisms—constitutional protections, legal frameworks, institutional structures—but systematically fail to detect functional hollowness when mechanisms are captured by those they should oversee. The dataset demonstrates how "Potemkin institutions" can generate elite governance scores (1.80σ above global mean) while operationally ensuring leadership protection through:



Definitional gatekeeping: Undefined "public interest" standard preventing predictability or principled challenge

Bureaucratic absorption: Procedural complexity neutralizing complaints that cannot be simply rejected

Structural retaliation exposure: 90% of filers learn only after submission they lack legal protection

Strategic information control: Redaction of systematic patterns, leadership failures, resource misallocation


Policy Implications

The findings challenge assumptions underlying EU Whistleblower Directive (2019/1937) implementation, which presumes formal compliance produces functional protection. Sweden's case demonstrates that mandating internal reporting channels without structural independence or enforcement mechanisms enables organizational capture. The 0.3% utilization rate and employee avoidance of official channels despite legal protection nominally available suggests rational response to institutional reality rather than cultural reluctance.

Replication & Extension

All analysis code is provided in executable Jupyter notebook format with detailed documentation. Researchers can:



Replicate statistical findings using provided IPRI dataset

Extend temporal analysis as new IPRI data becomes available

Apply analytical framework to whistleblower functions in other national contexts

Compare Swedish patterns to other high-governance countries with captured accountability mechanisms


Data Availability & Transparency

Original Swedish police documents obtained through freedom of information requests are included with redactions preserved as received, enabling assessment of information control practices. IPRI data is publicly available international dataset included for convenience and version control. All statistical transformations documented in code with intermediate outputs preserved.

Significance

This dataset provides the first comprehensive empirical documentation of accountability mechanism capture in a top-tier governance system, revealing how formal compliance can coexist with substantive impunity when oversight structures lack genuine independence from those they monitor.



Keywords: whistleblower protection, institutional capture, governance measurement, police accountability, organizational dysfunction, Sweden, IPRI, Nordic governance, accountability mechanisms, elite oversight failure

Disciplines: Public Administration, Organizational Sociology, Comparative Politics, Governance Studies, Police Studies, Institutional Analysis

Temporal Coverage: 2007-2025 (IPRI data), 2024 (whistleblower complaints)

Geographic Coverage: Sweden (primary), Nordic countries (comparative), Global (benchmarking)