Coronavirus Pandemic as a Get-Out-of-Jail Card for Italian Mafia

The coronavirus pandemic has turned the world upside down. Massive concerns rise in regards to how to deal with the new normalcy of everyday life. Due to this pandemic, prisons all over the world have become a hotspot for the spread of coronavirus due to the close living proximity experienced by inmates. Measures have been taken all over the world to prevent this, for instance, the Italian government has allowed several inmates over the age of 70 to be transferred from prison to house arrest. In Italy, where an extraordinary number of inmates are connected to the mafia, the government decision in regards to this measure has led to the release of several notorious crime bosses. This will be seen by the mafia as a loophole to be exploited. Due to this new policy, as many as 70 mafia bosses may be eligible to be transferred to the house arrest. There are some who have already been transferred, including Francesco Bonura. Francesco Bonura is 78 years old mafia boss who served eight years of the 23-year sentence imposed on him for racketeering and cocaine trafficking in a case involving other top Sicilian bosses in 2012. In the 1990s, Bonura got off on a technicality in a case in which authorities charged him with five murders. He is still considered as the head of the Uditore crime family of Sicily. Another crime boss who has been transferred from prison to house arrest is Vincenzino Iannazzo. He is the boss of the Ndrangheta crime family from the southern province of Calabria. Iannazzo’s case is more interesting because he is only 65 years old and should not be eligible for the transfer. However, his lawyer convinced a judge to transfer him to house arrest, even though he is younger than 70, claiming he was at risk to the virus based on his gender and age.

This particular decision has drawn much criticism from the public element. Several prosecutors and investigators have been known to state harsh criticism, saying that releasing mafia bosses will allow them to return to their home turf and reinforce their control over affiliates and local businesses, even if they were under house arrest. Italy’s anti-mafia Chief Prosecutor, Federico Cafiero de Raho, stated that it is particularly odd to have let out those serving time under the country’s harsh prison isolation regime. He also emphasized that the government seems to be carried away with panic while thermal scanners should be enough to treat these mafia bosses rather than transferring them to house confinement. The Mayor of Palermo, Leoluca Orlando, also stated his criticism by saying that these crime bosses can do anything they want if they are being released, including rebuilding their illegal business merely by giving orders to the members of the crime family. From a political point of view, this decision has been seen as a blunder produced by the incumbent left-wing government and created ammunition for the right-wing opposition. Prosecutors, victims’ groups and opposition parties have heaped blame on Justice Minister, Alfonso Bonafede. Far-right League leader, Matteo Salvini, has in particular been beating the drum by calling for a vote of no-confidence towards Bonafede.

The coronavirus pandemic might force the government to enact some unusual measures. However, putting mafia bosses back to their home turf is seen as an act of betrayal and disrespect towards the public and victims of mafia’s brutality, since the country has a long history with many violence conducted by the mafia. During this crisis, it is very possible for mafia organizations to furtherly infiltrate the economic life of Italy’s citizens, especially during this period of financial difficulties. Furthermore, returning mafia bosses to their home turf where it would be more difficult to monitor their communication with the outside world, would be seen as sending a message of weakness which could be exploited by the Mafia. It could also indicate that the Italian government is easing its approach in regards to fighting organized crime in the country.

Haiti a potential melting pot of crises

Ten years ago, on January 12, 2010 a deadly magnitude 7.0 earthquake shook the nation of Haiti for 35 seconds causing devastating destruction to the country. Since then, the nation has faced ten years of disarray which have included political corruption, economic difficulties, violence linked to anti-government protests and a humanitarian crisis. The direct aftermath of the earthquake saw the death of around 300,000 and the most recognisable buildings in Port-au-Prince Haiti’s capital levelled. Haiti is particularly vulnerable to national disasters and only two years prior, in 2008, was hit by four hurricanes. In 2016 Haiti experienced further devastation from Hurricane Matthew.  The 2010 earthquake however was reported to be one of the mostly deadly recorded in history and in response to the devastation experienced by Haiti, nations around the globe including the United States, the United Kingdom and China pledged to provide aid, money, and support to help save lives of those affected.

Cholera Epidemic

In October 2010, while trying to recover from the devastation of the earthquake, a cholera epidemic broke out across the nation, which took nearly a decade to overcome with some cases still lingering. During the peak of the epidemic in October 2012, only two years into the outbreak 7,000 had already died from the outbreak,by 2018 nearly 10,000 people had died from the disease with over 800,000 becoming sick from the outbreak. At the onset of cholera outbreak, hundreds of thousands of the Haitian population were still living in temporary camps of tents which were overcrowded, with limited access to electricity, water, and food, making them extremelyvulnerable to the disease.

The cholera outbreak further affected the weakened Caribbean nation which prior to the earthquake was already suffering food shortages, a political crisis and had a damaged health care system that  was put under further pressure with the outbreak. With most hospital facilities significantly damaged in the wake of the 2010 earthquake, medical care to treat those affected by the cholera outbreak was being provided in temporary hospitals while construction was taking place to rebuild permanent ones. At the time of the outbreak it was not known what caused the epidemic, which resulted in some of the population becoming scared and as the fear spread across the country a wave of violence erupted. This fear resulted in priests of the Caribbean religion of Voodoo facing unwarranted violence, which lead to the death of 45 priests who were blamed for the outbreak. It was only in the later years of the outbreak that it is true cause was revealed – a United Nations aid workers had accidentally started it; with the introduction of peacekeepers in 2010 where they were re-deployed from Nepal, where a cholera outbreak was underway, to help in emergency work following the earthquake. Scientists believe that waste from the base where these peacekeepers were located leaked into the river starting the outbreak. While the UN admitted that the outbreak had been caused by one of their peacemakers who had deployed to the country from Nepal, a civil case brought against the UN resulted in no prosecution or accountability. In October 2018, eight years after the outbreak initially began, it started to stabilize, though it did not completely disappear.

Donations and Funding

Following the 2010 earthquake, billions of dollars were raised and donated to Haiti to help rebuild the nation.  However, it has been a slow road to recovery with very little seeming to have been done. In 2012 the Prime Minister of Haiti Gary Conille reported that the aid provided to Haiti was scattered and there was a lack of coordination. Furthermore, aid groups were being criticized for their lack of shifting from emergency aid to focusing on helping the country develop and rebuild. The political situation at the time also hindered the aid process. Due to a long history of chronic government corruption, a number of non-governmental organizations and aid donors set their own priorities with minimal coordination. By the time that President Jovenel Moise came to power in 2017, he had reported that he was unsure where the aid was spent as little had been achieved to show for it. People were still living in temporary camps, though they were now equipped with electricity and access to clean water. At the time, President Moise disclosed that he believed only a fraction of aid went directly to the government. Experts however have blamed bad governance, excessive bureaucracy, and inflated contracts with foreign companies. One of the main projects of the financial aid was the rebuilding of the state university of Haiti hospital, and it is one of the most advanced projects to date with some construction having been started; however, the hospital remains unfinished with piles of building materials lining the road to the new hospital and as of January 2020 the old hospital is struggling to serve the community. President Moise has requested further funding to help establish the economy and the country, and has stated that he is actively working to improve collaboration among the institutions in Haiti and also international bodies to ensure that money is spent effectively in the future.

Humanitarian Crisis

As well as facing a cholera outbreak and continuing to recover from the damage caused by the devastating earthquake in 2010, Haiti is now facing one of the worst humanitarian crises with 1 in 3 people, around 3.7 million, in urgent need of food assistance. Due to Haiti being impacted by natural disasters on a relatively regular basis, the country has suffered from high levels of instability, including droughts which have ravaged harvests and which have resulted in shortages of food and inflations of prices of basic necessities. Furthermore, a collapse in the Haitian currency of Gourde in 2015 which continues to depreciate every year, made it more difficult for the population to access food which is imported into the country, as the average income per person is around $0.40 a day. As well as limited access to food due to droughts and price inflation, food and resources became hard to come by because of protests against the government, during the closing months of 2019, protesters blocked roads, which prevented the transportation of goods and food aid for the people of Haiti. These actions prevented those in need getting vital aid, which has only amplified the humanitarian crisis which has left large swaths of the Haitian population struggling to get food and survive. International aid has been provided however, to overcome the poverty and lack of food furtherinternational intervention is required.

COVID-19

While Haiti continues to be impacted by a poor economic situation, coupled with an ongoing humanitarian crisis and unstable political situation, it has to date not been severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which globally has seen over 300,000 deaths and over 4 million confirmed cases. To date, Haiti has reported at least 182 cases and 15 related deaths. This figure however is likely low and the situation on the ground is likely significantly worse. The number of tests being carried out in Haiti is unknown, which can explain why the official figures coming out of Haiti are so low. The limited access to resources and the damaged medical system which is still recovering from 2010s earthquake means that higher test rates are not being carried out. However, some analysts have said that along with the low-test rate there may actually be a lower number of cases due to the political turmoil and protests, having kept international travellers away from the country keeping the figures low. However, due to the low number of tests being carried out this is only speculation and unable to be proven until more tests are being carried out, with true figures being represented.

Another reason why the figures for COVID-19 might not be true is people are afraid to come in and get tested, due to groups of gun toting vigilantes threatening to lynch people infected with the virus. This fear of people being lynched and attacked due to the virus are strong due to the actions and violence which took place during the cholera outbreak. As well as patients being attacked, doctors and nurses are also facing hostility and violence with some being doused in bleach by people on the streets in Haiti. In order to protect patients and medical staff alike, hospitals have taken to releasing recovered patients in the middle of the night. On top of the fear of attack on patients and medical staff, leaders of the Voodoo religious community, with fresh memories of the attacks on priests during the cholera epidemic, have been appearing on radio and television to dispel any notion that they may be linked to the virus and that they did not conjure it up.

Further complicating the situation is the fact that there is a strong belief amongst the local population that the government is lying about the amount of cases and deaths, to gain financially. This has in turn resulted in doubts about following health precautions and has even led to some disbelieving COVID-19 diagnoses.  Which has resulted in a number of cases where families have turned up to hospitals and have physically removed family members from medical care, often resulting in the patient’s death. In one instance in the south-eastern Cotes-de-Fer region, fifty people came and removed a family member who had tested positive for COVID-19. The individual died the following day; however, members of the entourage have since refused to be tested and have even set up barricades on the roads into their village to prevent authorities or medical teams coming in to test them.

As well as people who are infected or recovered there has been a growing fear over the people who have died from the virus. With families being blocked from graveyards and prevented from burying their loved ones as some fear that those who have died from COVID-19 being buried in the graveyard  could cause contamination.  One solution to this has been that individuals who have died as a result of COVID-19 are now being buried 13 feet down with concrete poured on top to prevent contagion. Despite every precaution the country has taken and can take considering the limited access to resources there is a huge fear that the pandemic could, potentially still hit the country hard. This is likely to increase as a lot of Haitians return from the Dominican Republic due to job losses. This migration of population could increase the number of cases as the Dominican Republic is one of the worst hit nations in the region, with 15,264 confirmed cases having only had 8,534 recovered with 468 deaths. On top of this basic sanitation is a challenge in the slums and rural hinterlands in Haiti, which are still present following the 2010 earthquake, all of these can affect the possibility of COVID-19 hitting Haiti hard. Along with the increasing fear and evident lack of resources, Haiti could have a higher case count then recorded as people are not able to be tested due to the medical system not having the ability to test. As well as the population having a growing fear of the virus and disbelief of the seriousness of the illness not willing to get tested if offered. . All of these issues, lack of resources, a growing disbelief in the virus and even the fear of it can contribute to the virus already being widely present in the country, or even hitting the country harder when he does pick up speed.

Conclusion

The current situation in Haiti complex, with a lot of the issues stemming from the 2010 earthquake and a lack of reconstruction in the years that followed. The low official figures of cases are attributed to the fact that there is not enough resources to carry out tests, with analysts and medical professionals believing the number of cases in Haiti to be a lot higher than is recorded. However, the current situation in Haiti is not only affecting the medical system and the possible increase of cases of COVID-19, it has also affected the economy and created a humanitarian crisis for the nation. With an unstable government in Haiti over the years has restricted the amount of aid they can access from the international community, with hundreds of millions of dollars in international aid funds as well as loans from the World Bank, and Inter-American Bank earmarked for Haiti. Looking at the events over the last 10 years it can be said that Haiti could be facing a catastrophe if the pandemic hits the country hard it could lead to an overwhelming number of cases. Which will put further pressure on the already struggling medical system and a people with high suspicion and fear of such a pandemic. Due to the poor use of international aid from the earthquake, Haiti could find itself struggling to counter the pandemic and could prevent further international support.

Will China see Taiwan as getting too big for its boots?

The saying goes that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

“We will not accept the Beijing authorities’ use of ‘one country, two systems’ to downgrade Taiwan and undermine cross-strait status quo”. Words from none other than Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen.

China has always claimed Taiwan to be part of its territory, and has been overt in its threats to militarily bring it to heel if push comes to shove.  The hawkish Chinese rhetoric towards Taiwan has gotten ever more pointed since pro-independence President Tsai Ing-wen got re-elected earlier in the year in a landslide over an opposition candidate backed by Beijing. That said, there has been a cross current of events on the global stage that has put Taiwan in China’s crosshairs like nothing in the recent past – In what has no doubt been a frosty and contentious relationship between the two countries.

Chinese President Xi Jimping delivered the opening speech at the annual meeting of the World Health Organisation on May 18th making a number of pledges to the international battle to stem Covid-19, including a $2 billion commitment. However, China’s handling of the coronavirus, pre-pandemic stage, has drawn the ire and criticism of many nations – who complained over what was perceived as its lack of transparency and disclosure on the origins of the disease.

Taiwan, on the other hand has been eulogised as an exemplar of how to wage an effective response to Covid-19 with its pro-active public health policy accounting for only 7 deaths from 441 infections, and a rigorous regime of testing, tracing, and isolating of hundreds of thousands of its citizens. Against this backdrop, 29 countries, including America called for Taiwan to be at the WHO meeting as an observer. The request was blocked by Beijing, a move consistent with its stance of claim to Taiwan, and denying it any form of international recognition.

“Taiwan can help” is the sloganeering initiative used by Taiwan in its outreach to offer international donations and assistance to countries whose health care systems have been swamped by Covid-19 infections. In April, its foreign ministry announced the donation of 10 million masks to Europe, America, and the 15 countries with which it has diplomatic relations. US Secretary of state called the gesture from Taipei a “model for the World”. A “gesture of solidarity” were the words of Ursula von der Leyen President of the European Commission.  Taiwan is also working on bilateral partnerships and cooperation with America, Czech Republic, and India. These developments have been characterised by Beijing as a “despicable move and a political plot to use the Covid-19 Pandemic to achieve independence” and embarking on a wrongful path of confrontation with the motherland.

There is little doubt that Taiwan is taking advantage of its good fortunes on the International stage from the Covid-19 fall out, to ramp-up its soft power profile, and drive a wedge in the pro-Beijing global camp. America has sniffed opportunities similarly – by using Taiwan as a tool in its attempts to stymie Chinese Telecommunications behemoth Huawei. America has sought to traduce Huawei as a spying instrument for the Chinese government, and create stigma on the brand as it bids to win contracts to build 5G Networks of Countries America considers allies. Huawei is reliant on one of the biggest computer chip makers in the world – Taiwan Semi-Conductor manufacturing Company (TSMC) as a high-tech supply chain of the vital component – microchips. Washington has agreed to bear some of the cost of getting the Taiwanese chip making giant to set-up a manufacturing base in Arizona, with the upshot being a Taiwanese company at odds with a Chinese state backed company to the potential advantage of a rival – America.

What does this all mean? The Chinese have always emphasized the One China policy as the bedrock of its foreign relations. It has sought to use this position to ward off any form foreign overtures into this orbit it sees as its exclusive prerogative. Taiwan has flirted with the idea of its Independence. It has a vibrant democracy, and in recent surveys, its people have favoured closer ties with America rather than China. These latest developments mark an inflection point. China could never accept losing face, least not in the trifecta of American manoeuvrings on a Taiwanese Company, Taipei’s soft power projection, and all the blow-back that has come China’s way over the Covid-19 pandemic.

Taiwan’s recent positive global attention has sparked a chauvinistic response in China with calls for “reclaim” of the Island. Social media and the Chinese media have ratcheted-up calls for the Army to invade Taiwan.  America has stepped up its Naval presence close to the Taiwanese straits; CNN reports that in recent weeks, the Liaoning, China’s sole Aircraft carrier has sailed around the Island of Taiwan. It really does sound like the kettle is at boiling point.

Most analyst take a contrarian view, suggesting that military action by Beijing is not on the table. Timothy Heath, an international researcher at the RAND Corporation (a US think tank) muses that “China needs access to the (global) markets once they recover, and so it in China’s interests to maintain good ties with US and the World”.

That being said, no one can deny the rising tensions coming at such a precarious moment has a dangerous potential. There is a limit to how much Beijing can eschew, and if Taiwan goes off on a limb, China will probably suffer any cost, markets included – to protect its One China policy.

Will Cyber Surveillance Continue Post-COVID-19?

Recently, historian Yuval Noah Harari said that people “could look back in 100 years and identify the coronavirus epidemic as the moment when a new regime of surveillance took over…”. Eastern European countries are currently moving towards unprecedented surveillance methods to enable tracking of suspected COVID-19 cases and to enforce lockdowns. Slovenia said it would not compromise the right to privacy in order to use technological tools that enable contact tracing. Meanwhile most other countries in the region have made such compromises.

Poland launched an app which uses a mobile location service and facial recognition, and sends random requests for users to take pictures as evidence that they’re home. Bulgarian police were authorised to request data from mobile and internet communications to monitor citizens under mandatory quarantine. Ukraine, Slovakia and Lithuania enacted laws enabling location tracking systems. Estonia instructed its statistics office to use mobile geolocation data from phone companies to study citizens’ movement. Serbia tracked Italian telephone numbers to check whether people returning from Italy were self-isolating. Albania and Croatia used drones to monitor compliance with lockdowns. Hungary issued a decree relaxing the obligation of authorities to notify individuals when collecting personal data when done for COVID-19 purposes. Moscow introduced an automatic permit checking system for public transport. If citizens don’t have permission to be outside they will be fined. In addition, Moscow’s 170,000 street cameras and facial recognition software now target possible coronavirus carriers who violate COVID-19 restrictions.

Opposition activists in Moscow say this will lead to unprecedented government intrusion, dubbing it a “digital concentration camp”. Meanwhile Moscow mayor Sobyanin said: “When we talk about the health and lives of an enormous amount of people, there’s no choice.” The right to private life is protected by international law under Art 8 ECHR and Art 17 ICCPR, but can be restricted under certain circumstances. It must serve to protect a legitimate aim, one of which are the protection of public health, and the measures adopted must be temporary; proportionate; and necessary. In many States, privacy rights have now given way to public health. States were warned in a joint statement by 107 organisations, including Amnesty International, to respect human rights when employing cyber surveillance to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. In its Statement on the processing of personal data in the context of COVID-19, the European Data Protection Board said that when it is not possible to only process anonymous mobile location data Member States should introduce legislative measures to safeguard public security when processing non-anonymized location data.

The system used in Moscow stores user data which Sobyanin said will be deleted after self-isolation ends. It is however not guaranteed that this user data will simply disappear. In this digital age, security leaks are a very real possibility. Sarkis Darbinyan, lawyer for NGO Roskomsvoboda which monitors online freedom, said there “is a high probability that once the epidemic ends this data will start leaking to the [black] market, which happens to so many other data bases”. This information could also be misused by employees in the government or be stolen by other countries. The data collected during a health crisis could be particularly vulnerable as it is collected and used in a rush. According to Richard Searle, senior security architect, this raises the risk that sufficient diligence and information risk management is not applied to these types of apps and initiatives. Mikhail Klimarev, a technology expert, said: “Personal data will leak out. You don’t have to ask a fortune-teller to see that because the system is being made in a hurry.”

There is also fear that governments will be reluctant to relinquish these tools after the crisis has passed. When speaking about the Russian government, Leonid Volkov, chief strategist to the opposition leader, said: “If they have created it, they will never allow themselves to turn it off. It’s too tempting.” In addition, Artem Kozlyuk of Roskomsvoboda warned that “…in Russia, it’s always done behind closed doors. There’s a danger that after all this is over, the authorities won’t want to put these tools away.” The country has already seen a decline in online freedom in the name of security. The concern that Russia will continue using these surveillance technologies is therefore not surprising.

On the positive side, some governments are openly acknowledging the privacy issues raised by implementing such measures. Many of the surveillance measures adopted are more overt. For instance, the app introduced in Poland is an open-source, voluntary app that uses encryption and is trying to meet privacy requirements. After passing a law allowing collection of phone data, Slovakian Justice Minister Maria Kolikova said that they “realize that this is an infringement of fundamental rights and freedoms, let’s not pretend it is not.” It is recognised that crisis management sometimes require exceptional measures that undermine human rights. Undermining privacy rights can be justified as location tracking could mitigate the spread. It gives governments a better overview of the infected population. Apps can also help health care systems notify people who might have been infected.

Meanwhile human rights group Privacy International has questioned the effectiveness of some of these tools. For instance, there is limited evidence that location data proved useful in handling and predicting the spread of Ebola. Bernadett Szel, opposition politician in Hungary, said that restricting data rights “is unnecessary and disproportionate, and furthermore does not help, even hinders the fight against the epidemic.” People might mistakenly be identified as exposed to the virus or, even more concerning, people exposed mistakenly not identified. Location surveillance systems can also have a disproportionate effect on vulnerable groups in society. UN special rapporteur Fionnuala Ni Aolain said that the “danger is that states, particularly non-democratic or less open societies, would use the opportunity given by the health emergency to crack down on particular minority groups, or individuals or groups that they see as highly problematic.”

History shows that, in emergencies, governments fast-track measures without sufficient scrutiny. Such measures have sometimes outlasted the emergencies they were meant to address. Aolain points to 9/11 and the fact that emergency powers introduced after this event was still in place after 20 years. Taylor Monahan, CEO of MyCrypto, said that COVID-19 has raised fear and irrationality similar to post-9/11, only “now we fear our neighbors.” The pandemic has given governments a new momentum to introduce and enforce these tools. In addition, new technology has made it even easier for States to monitor their citizens.

It must be recognised that government surveillance can be a useful tool in mitigating the spread of the coronavirus. The question is what happens after. Scholars and rights groups are concerned that cybersurveillance may become normalised during this period. “The data access allowed and the infrastructure built today will not necessarily disappear once the current pandemic is over, but may be expanded and used for other purposes,” said Cohen, head of policy at enterprise software company Privitar. Not only might some governments retain their newly developed surveillance tools, but the data collected during the pandemic could be stolen by hackers. While the COVID-19 pandemic might justify prioritising public health over privacy for the moment, there is a danger that some of these surveillance measures will stay in place.

Sweden’s Refusal to Implement Strict Lockdown

Sweden has conducted an unusual approach towards the global coronavirus pandemic. The nation has rejected copying the measures implemented by other countries in Western Europe, which includes a complete nationwide lockdown. Instead, the country has been heavily relying on trusting public’s behaviour to follow the government’s request of social distancing. Some restrictions are implemented, such as banning public gatherings of more than 50 participants and visits to nursing homes. Some universities have also been closed and have instead implemented online learning. Other than that, everything is staying the same as there is no pandemic going. Primary schools, shops, restaurants, hair salons, and other public places have been kept open. The measure implemented is in stark contrast to the neighbouring Nordic countries which share similar cultural, geographical, and sociological traits such as Norway, Denmark, and Finland. The three neighbouring countries have implemented strict nationwide lockdowns, closing all schools, restaurants, and other public places. Sweden’s government however stated that lockdown in Sweden will be pointless because Swedes could be trusted to conduct social distancing. Around 75% of Sweden’s population agreed with the measures taken by the government. However, many of Sweden’s scientists have been accusing the government of experimenting with people’s lives. The international community has also condemned Sweden’s lack of action and accused the government of trying to reach ‘herd immunity’. The accusations have been denied by Swedish Minister of Health and Social Affairs, Lena Hallengren, stating that Sweden has no plan to create herd immunity and shares the same goals as other countries, which is to save people’s lives. Still, the World Health Organization (WHO) has called on Sweden to take more measures in regards to controlling the spread of the virus.  Other than that, data has shown several indications that Sweden’s refusal on implementing strict lockdown might be a failure and should be evaluated.

As of 30 April 2020, the confirmed cases of coronavirus in Sweden have reached 21,092 cases with 2,586 deaths. This statistic is significantly higher compared to the neighbouring Nordic countries. In Denmark, the confirmed cases of coronavirus have only reached 9,158 cases with 452 deaths. In Finland, the confirmed cases of coronavirus have only reached 4,995 cases with 211 deaths while in Norway, the confirmed cases of coronavirus have only reached 7,738 cases with 210 deaths. The confirmed cases in Sweden are more than double the numbers in Denmark, more than four times the numbers in Finland, and almost three times the numbers in Norway. In regards to the number of deaths, the statistics of Sweden’s fatalities related to the coronavirus shows that the number of deaths in Sweden is more than five times the numbers in Denmark and more than ten times the numbers in Finland and Norway. Sweden might have a bigger population than the other three Nordic countries, with around 10 million people while compared to some 5 million living in Denmark, Finland, and Norway respectively. However, the spread of coronavirus in Sweden will still be significantly higher and dangerous even if Sweden has the same population as Denmark, Finland, and Norway. For instance, one of the factors that affect this judgment is the death rate within each country.  According to the figures from John Hopkins University, the death rate in Sweden has reached more than 22 per 100,000 people, which is significantly higher than the three other Nordic countries. By contrast, the death rate in Denmark is only 7 per 100,000 people, while in Finland and Norway is only 4 per 100,000 people.

The statistics of confirmed cases, total deaths, and death rate in Sweden may not be as high as countries like Spain and Italy. However there are various complex differences between Sweden and these countries that make direct comparisons harder. For example, Italy has a higher aging population and a higher number of smokers within the country than Sweden. Also, the statistics in Sweden should be more similar to the neighbouring Nordic countries such as Denmark, Finland, and Norway, which share many similar traits with Sweden. There must be a reason why Sweden’s statistics are significantly higher than the neighbouring Nordic countries and the most obvious one is Sweden’s refusal on implementing strict nationwide lockdown. Even the Swedish Health Agency has predicted that 26% of the Stockholm population will have been infected by May 1 if the country does not make its measure on fighting coronavirus stricter. Therefore, it is believed that Sweden should implement more restrictions as other countries in order to achieve a better situation due to the global coronavirus pandemic.