Police should be impartial regarding politics.
Not only that. People can be angry at the press for not going with this story, but that's their editorial right to not do so, freedom of the press and all that. It might be a failure of their"journalistic duty" to "inform the public", but it's still perfectly legal, and a fair editorial decision to do so, and they can be properly punished by the public by having their reputation destroyed.
But on the other hand, a police action of that size, removing 200 people from an area,
must
have at some point been mentioned to some sort of political committee of justice, at least in passing or in a report. After all, it must have required significant police resources to do the job in the first place. If the police chief had made the decision to not inform the proper political organ of this, then we're not only looking at some sort of gross negligence, we're looking at someone actually breaking the law.
And if politicians
were
informed of this, then we're potentially looking at either politicians, or public servants, scrubbing minutes of political meetings from the public to suit their agenda, which is not only extremely illegal, but also extremely harmful for any trust there must be in people's trust in the public offices.
This is far more than the actual case, it's far more than a discussion of Swedish immigration policies, self censorship, public employees abusing their power to suit their agenda or public opinion, this might even very well be a case of the public being denied access to freedom of information of what goes on within the executive branch itself, which is a far bigger and systemic problem than this case itself.