The Council of Europe

Mattias Jonsson (S)

Madam Speaker! We are now going to have a debate on a report on the Council of Europe's work during the previous year, 2025, which is challenging. It is a restless time when democracy is being challenged in more places than we have seen in a very long time. In that case, the work for human rights, the principles of the rule of law, and international solidarity becomes more important than ever. Therefore, the Council of Europe and its parliamentary assembly are not just any institutions – they are fundamentals in the European cooperation.

Since its founding in 1949, the Council of Europe has been a unifying force for democracy, human rights, and the principles of the rule of law, which are now being challenged. Through the European Convention, a common protection for people's civil and political rights was created across our continent. For us Social Democrats, these are not just abstract principles. It is about people's opportunities to live free lives, feel security in the face of the state, and know that the law applies equally to everyone living on our continent.

Madam Speaker! It has been noted that the European Convention has reached its 75th anniversary. It is an important jubilee but also an important occasion for self-reflection. What is a convention worth if judgments are subsequently not enforced? What are rights worth if states choose to turn a blind eye to them?

Unfortunately, we see that several member countries still do not follow the European Court of Human Rights' rulings. Countries such as Azerbaijan, Hungary, Turkey and several others have major problems with respecting the obligations that they themselves have committed to. This undermines trust in the entire European legal system.

We Social Democrats believe that the principles of the rule of law must never become negotiable. Democracy is not just about holding elections. It is also about free media, independent courts, respect for the opposition, and protection for civil society. When these institutions are weakened, Europe must react clearly.

Madam Speaker! During the year, the developments in Georgia have caused great concern in the Council of Europe. The democratic regression is serious, and measures against the opposition and civil society risk leading the country towards a more authoritarian rule. Also, the situation in Azerbaijan, which I mentioned, is deeply concerning, with politically motivated deprivations of liberty and serious restrictions of human rights.

It is right that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe marks its opposition to such abuses. Democracy cannot be defended through silence. Europe must stand up for the people who dare to protest, the journalists who dare and shall scrutinize power, and the oppositionists who risk their freedom to defend democracy.

Madam Speaker! At the same time, Russia's brutal war of aggression in Ukraine continues to characterize Europe's security policy situation. Since the full-scale invasion began, the parliamentary assembly has had Ukraine at the top of the agenda at every session, which is absolutely necessary.

Russia's war is not just an attack on Ukraine. It is an attack on international law, on European security, and on human dignity itself. We have seen bombs falling on residential buildings, systematic attacks against hospitals and schools, as well as systematic abuses against civilians. War crimes must be documented, and accountability must be demanded.

Therefore, the decision to support an international reparations commission is an important step forward. The people who have lost their homes, their relatives, and their life chances deserve justice. Russia must be held accountable for the crimes that it has committed and that it commits every day.

We have also initiated an ad hoc committee for the tens of thousands of Ukrainian children who have been taken away into Russia. This is a serious crime in itself.

Sweden shall continue to be a strong voice for Ukraine's freedom and independence. Solidarity with Ukraine is ultimately about defending the principles that borders must not be moved by force and that people have the right to live in peace and freedom.

I am pleased that all parties in the Riksdag stand united. In the Council of Europe, we have also had an intensified cooperation with the Nordic-Baltic countries. Not least the countries in the Baltics feel a tangible aggression from Russia. It concerns GPS interference on aircraft, the Baltic Sea, violations of airspace and so on, which makes Russia's actions feel more and more tangible.

Madam Speaker! During the year, the horrific situation in Gaza has also been discussed at all sessions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. We see enormous suffering. Children are being killed, families are being driven into flight, and access to food, medical care, and humanitarian aid is catastrophically limited. It is obvious that the hostages must be released. It is equally obvious that international humanitarian law must be respected by all parties. Civilians must never bear the burden of the brutality of war.

For us Social Democrats, human dignity is universal. This applies regardless of whether people live in Kyiv, Tel Aviv or Gaza. Therefore, Europe must continue to work for a ceasefire, humanitarian aid and a long-term peaceful solution that must be based on international law.

Madam Speaker! We see how the threats to democracy are changing. Today, democracy is also challenged through disinformation, foreign influence, and manipulation of public discourse. Artificial intelligence and digital technology, of course, create very good and fine opportunities but also new risks. Electoral processes can be influenced, lies can be spread faster than truths, and people's trust in democratic institutions can be undermined.

That is why Europe needs to strengthen the work for democratic security. We must protect free elections, strengthen resilience against disinformation, and defend open democratic dialogue. Technology should, of course, serve democracy – not threaten it.

Madam Speaker! The Council of Europe plays a crucial role here. In a time when nationalist forces want to divide Europe, we need more cooperation, not less. We need stronger international institutions that stand up for human rights and the principles of the rule of law, even when it may feel uncomfortable.

European cooperation is ultimately based on a simple but powerful idea: that peace, freedom and democracy can never be taken for granted. They must be defended every day. That responsibility also rests on us here in the Swedish Riksdag. Together we shall stand up for international law, we shall defend democracy and we shall never hesitate to speak out when human rights are violated.

In the end, this is about what kind of Europe we want to hand over to the next generation: a Europe characterized by fear, authoritarian forces and division, or a Europe built on solidarity, democracy and the equal value of people. For us Social Democrats, the answer is obvious and given.

I submit the report from the previous year and want to raise a warning finger regarding the receipt chaos we have in this assembly. It means that we who sit in the Council of Europe and who are present at committee meetings, meetings between our delegations and delegation meetings cannot be present in Strasbourg, Paris or where we have our meetings. We are not allowed to leave the Riksdag, because we must be here and vote. A consequence of this is that the Swedish voice is missing in many assemblies right now. Therefore, it is important to resolve this chaos.

Finally, Madam Speaker: This is actually the last time this parliamentary term that we have a report back from the Council of Europe. I would like to thank the members of the Swedish delegation, the chairman and all the others, and the officials from the International Office for good cooperation, as well as the Riksdag's officials for good support.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Madam Speaker! Another year has passed since we last debated the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in the Riksdag. It has been a year in which Europe has once again been forced to confront its own vulnerability, and once again a year in which the words democracy, the rule of law, and human rights can no longer be empty phrases but must be backed up by action. At the same time as the Assembly turns 75, it struggles to remain relevant in a time when authoritarian forces are testing its limits.

Madam Speaker! Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine has continued to dominate the agenda. It is no exaggeration to say that this war has become the bloody reminder of why the Council of Europe exists in the first place. During 2025, the Assembly adopted several resolutions on the legal aspects of the aggression, on support for reconstruction, and on the role of sanctions. We have pushed for a special tribunal for crimes of aggression, a compensation commission, and a damage register, which now handles tens of thousands of applications.

Furthermore, we have decided to make room in the assembly for Russia's democratic forces. We shall see how it goes, but it is a laudable initiative. In the best-case scenario, it could be as successful as the Belarusian counterpart.

Ukraine has been placed at the center, and it is, to put it mildly, completely right. But let us also be honest, Madam Speaker: The words are many but the efforts for accountability are still far too slow. Russia is committing crimes against humanity. We in Europe must ensure that no Russian perpetrator can hide behind immunity. To speak of peace without justice is to betray the victims.

At the same time, we have seen a worrying democratic regression in several member states – Mattias Jonsson mentioned a number of them.

Georgia chose to leave the assembly in protest after we conditioned the country's accreditation. The situation there is alarming: repression against the opposition, restrictions of freedoms, and a movement towards a more authoritarian rule.

Azerbaijan is gone, and many remember how several of us were rewarded by being declared persona non grata after we had supported sanctions against that regime. This, if anything, says something about the view on democracy and freedom of expression in that country, and it is perhaps the best proof we can get that we actually made the right decision.

Turkey continues to cause concern with political prisoners, pressure on the media and not least on civil society, and a lack of enforcement of the European Court of Human Rights' judgments. When countries with over 40 non-enforced judgments do not comply, the credibility of the entire convention is eroded. It is not just about individual cases; it is a pattern. We see increased polarization, threats against journalists, reduced space for civil society, and a dangerous use of the judiciary against political opponents.

Madam Speaker! The new initiative New Democratic Pact is welcome, but this must not become yet another report that just gathers dust. We need concrete measures against foreign influence, against disinformation, and against AI's challenges for democracy. The Parliament has taken steps by forming alliances for free elections and by us not only discussing the many advantages but also the risks of artificial intelligence. The pace must be stepped up.

Sweden's delegation has, as usual, distinguished itself by being very active. I think we can all be very proud of that. We have participated in debates, committee cooperation, election observation, and much more. We have stood up for Ukraine, for the principles of the rule of law, and for the Council of Europe to be more than just a talking shop.

But we also cannot turn a blind eye to the organization's weaknesses. The enforcement of judgments is poor in several countries. Member states that do not respect fundamental values must be met with consequences, not just reports.

The Council of Europe can in many cases be seen as Europe's conscience. It has created the European Convention, fought against the death penalty and stood up for minorities. But in a time of hybrid threats, war on our continent and authoritarian tendencies, we must not rest on old laurels. The past year shows that democracy is not a given but something that must be defended every day.

Sweden shall continue to be a strong voice for a principled line. I particularly want to highlight three points: support for Ukraine until victory, zero tolerance for democratic erosion, and a European Council that lives up to its ideals.

Let us therefore leave this year with renewed strength, not with naive optimism but with sharp determination. Europe deserves better than compromises with tyranny.

Madam Speaker! Since I am not standing for candidacy in this year's election, this will be my final speech addressing the annually recurring motion regarding the Council of Europe. When, a little more than ten years ago, I was asked by Madam Speaker to take her place in the Council of Europe delegation, I was hesitant, I shall honestly admit – very hesitant, even. It was even to the point that Madam Speaker had to convince me to take the position. At that time, I thought that one could perhaps take it for a few years or so.

But now it has been over ten years. I am incredibly grateful that Madam Speaker convinced me. It has been very exhausting these years, but incredibly fun and very educational. And what an incredible network one has been able to build! So thank you very much, once again!

This delegation still has more work to do before the new delegation takes over, not least a couple of sessions. But I would still like to take the opportunity to thank, not least Vice Chairman Mattias Jonsson. It has been great fun to work with you during these years. The rest of the delegation and the secretariat have also done a fantastic job. It has, as mentioned, been four exciting and incredibly rewarding years. I can actually say that this delegation is probably the best of the delegations I have sat in during these ten years.

We do not know what the next delegation will look like after the election, but I also wish them warm success in this work.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Boriana Åberg (M)

Madam Speaker! On 24 February 2022, the world woke up to a terrifying news: Russia had invaded Ukraine. What Putin then called a military special operation that would take three days is still ongoing today. The Ukrainians were not surprised. In fact, our Ukrainian colleagues in the Council of Europe had warned that an invasion was underway as early as when Russia occupied Crimea.

What was surprising was the unwavering resistance of the Ukrainian people. For more than four years, the Ukrainians have fought against the numerically larger and militarily stronger aggressor. Hospitals, schools, shopping centers, and homes have been bombed to pieces with cluster munitions intended to harm and kill as many as possible.

Cluster munitions, which are prohibited under international law, have been used against innocent civilians. Russia has demonstrated an indescribable contempt for human life and violated the laws of war.

That is why Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine continued to be at the top of the agenda in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe during 2025, the operational year we are debating today. During the year, no fewer than seven resolutions were adopted regarding Ukraine, including those on accountability for Russian war crimes, the legal and human rights aspects of Russia's war of aggression, negotiations to achieve the release and exchange of prisoners of war, as well as imprisoned Ukrainian journalists in Russian captivity.

To help Ukrainian children who have been abducted by the Russians, a network was created in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. More than 16,000 children have been kidnapped by the aggressor. Many of the younger ones have been adopted away. The older ones have been sent to training camps where they learn to handle weapons and practice combat techniques to later be drafted into the Russian army and fight against their fellow countrymen and relatives.

The brutal purpose of the removals is to erase the children's Ukrainian identity, and therefore this must be stopped and the children repatriated immediately.

Madam Speaker! In the European Council, Ukraine's suffering has been raised in all contexts – a suffering caused not only by Russia's barbarity but also by the world's silence, by the fear that the war in some way becomes normalized. A danger has been seen that the world becomes accustomed to the headlines about airstrikes and discovered mass graves or, in the worst case, that the horrors of war do not even become a notice in the newspaper.

That is why the Council of Europe exists: to uphold the moral standards. The Council of Europe was created based on Winston Churchill's idea, so that the horrors of the Second World War would never be repeated.

The Council of Europe is the first and so far only organization that has expelled Russia. It was also in the Council of Europe that the idea of an international tribunal to hold those responsible for the war in Ukraine accountable was born.

Today, President Zelenskyy is visiting Sweden, and I am proud of the support that the government and the Swedish people have given and continue to give to Ukraine, until Ukraine triumphs.

During the 2025 summer session, President Zelenskyy also visited the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and signed the agreement on a tribunal that shall dispense justice, not by brute force but with the help of the law – with the help of thousands of testimonies regarding Russia's war crimes.

In my speech, I mentioned the Nuremberg Tribunal and the tribunal in The Hague that judged the perpetrators of the Second World War and from the war in the former Yugoslavia, as a reminder that justice is possible. But to bring war criminals to justice, it is required that the good win the war.

Let me say something about that matter of good and evil. There is a great consensus in the Council of Europe about who is good and who is evil in the war between Russia and Ukraine. When it comes, however, to the conflict between Israel and Palestine, the Council of Europe is polarized. It is shameful that some have forgotten the terror attack on October 7. It is tragic that one does not realize that the cause of the Gaza residents' suffering is spelled Hamas.

Madam Speaker! During 2025, the 75th anniversary of the establishment of the European Convention on Human Rights was celebrated. It is a convention that was signed during the 1950s, during a time when the oppression of communism plagued half of Europe.

The Convention is an important document, and the European Court of Human Rights is the body that interprets the Convention and examines its compliance.

In recent times, the application of the convention has been questioned because its interpretation has led to prohibitions on deportations if the deportee risks torture or degrading treatment in their home country. When the convention was written, the relevant Article 3 was intended to protect dissidents and others who had fled communism. Subsequently, the article has been misinterpreted, and various violent criminals, rapists, murderers, and terrorists have been allowed to stay in Europe because their home countries do not treat them according to the principles of the European Convention.

This leads to a paradox: The Convention provides protection to individuals who do not respect other people's human rights and the greatest of all, the right to life, and our rule of law is forced to accept that the well-being of criminals and terrorists weighs more heavily than the lives of law-abiding citizens.

As early as 2018, when Denmark held the presidency of the Council of Europe, the then Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen raised the issue of the interpretation of the convention that prevents the deportation of criminals. At that time, he received some criticism, including from the then Swedish Social Democratic government.

Seven years later, at the initiative of Denmark's Social Democratic Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the prime ministers of nine countries wrote a notable letter to the Council of Europe stating that the European Court of Human Rights has expanded the scope of the convention far beyond its original intentions, which limits national security, especially regarding the deportation of criminal migrants.

The letter received a cold reception from the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, who underlined that politicizing the European Court of Human Rights undermines its independence.

It is correct that politicians may not and should not decide how the European Court of Justice rules. But it is also correct that it is politicians who have the duty and the power to change laws that do not fulfill their purpose.

Therefore, it is very positive that the Ministers of Justice from 27 of the Council of Europe's member states, including Sweden, on 10 December 2025 made a joint statement on the need to update the application of the European Convention on Human Rights in today's complex world.

The diplomatic work continues, just as the work in the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly does. And the Swedish delegation is working well – we are among the most active and most present at the sessions.

I would like to thank my colleagues in the delegation, the chair, the vice-chair, and everyone else, for the good cooperation and for the respectful climate we have in the delegation. I would also like to extend a special thanks to our officials from the Riksdag's International Office for their invaluable help during 2025.

(Applause)

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg (M) concurred.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Gustaf Göthberg (M)

Madam Speaker! European history is not written at summits and in conference rooms or in pre-negotiated, finely tuned statements. It is written on the streets of Tbilisi, in the shelters of Kharkiv, and in the many small towns in the western Balkans where people are still waiting for what we other Europeans often take for granted: freedom, democracy, and the rule of law. It is also being written even as authoritarian forces try to intimidate Europe into silence. Right now, European courage is also being tested.

In Georgia, we see how many people – students, journalists, oppositionists, those who make up a majority in the country – wave European flags while the regime responds with repression. They demonstrate because they want to live in a European Georgia, not in a Russian sphere of influence.

It is ordinary people, like you and I, who want to be Europeans and belong to Europe, not Moscow. They are met with threats and violence and restrictions of freedom. They are met with legislative proposals that are pushed through in the Georgian parliament and which aim to silence civil society and stifle the free media. A majority of party leaders, trade union leaders, journalistic leaders, and leaders of religious minorities are imprisoned. The husband of the opposition leader, the brave Tina Bokuchava whom I am proud to call a friend of mine, has at one point been kidnapped. He was taken to a secret location, where he received threats from the regime against their three minor children.

This is happening in Europe today. It may not be in the heart of geographical Europe, but it is in Europe. Still, the Georgians choose to return night after night, evening after evening, to Rustaveli Avenue to demonstrate with the European flag in hand and show their will to be Europeans.

Madam Speaker! We cannot meet the developments in Georgia with cautious diplomacy, general concern, and the general statements that so often come quickly. When free media are pushed back and civil society is attacked, Europe must speak plainly, not because it is particularly easy, but because the alternative is always worse. We risk right now – if one is to speak plainly – turning our backs on a generation of Europeans who have turned to us. We must do more for Georgia.

Within the framework of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, we have taken a stand. It was my colleague Boriana Åberg who spoke in the Assembly when, in January 2025, we wanted to deny the Georgian delegation accreditation following the stolen election. They have not participated in the Assembly's work since then. The Assembly has on no fewer than three occasions held debates on the worrying developments in Georgia. The Parliamentary Assembly has furthermore stated that the democratic regression is serious and that there is now a risk of establishing an authoritarian rule.

We Moderates – perhaps most notably the undersigned – have also taken the initiative to review the use of chemical weapons against protesters in Georgia. Taste those words! It is, therefore, about the use of chemical weapons against protesters in Europe, today. This is being followed up by the Council of Europe.

But it is not just about Georgia. It is about which continent and which Europe we want. Russia is not just trying to take territory, as they are trying to do in Ukraine. They are, above all, trying to move the boundary of what people believe is possible. They are trying to nibble at the edges, to influence and create resignation, division, and that gnawing feeling that democracies perhaps still cannot hold out when it really matters. It is in this light we must see the situation in Georgia. And that is why we need to be clearer and stronger in our condemnations. It is also about supporting Georgian civil society, supporting the free journalists, and saying it as it is.

The people who are demonstrating for democracy in Tbilisi and in other places in Georgia are Europeans who stand up for European values, and we stand with them.

Madam Speaker! Where does European security actually begin? Is it at the national border or in the rules-based world order, which is currently being threatened? No, European security begins much earlier than that. It begins in questions: Do courts function? Do journalists dare to write? Do oppositionists dare to run for office? Do people trust that the state protects their freedom and not the other way around? If I may paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, I can say: Is the state the people's servant or the people's master? When it comes to this, the Council of Europe stands as the guardian.

Madam Speaker! During the year, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has continued its work in support of Ukraine, for women's rights, for the rule of law, and for democracy development in the Western Balkans.

There is sometimes a tendency in Western Europe to think that the Western Balkans are some kind of permanent waiting room for something that is not quite defined – a closed chapter, something to the side. But we know that the instability in the Balkans rarely stays in the Balkans. What is now happening in the Western Balkans – in their own right, it is growing corruption, strong foreign influence, and weak institutions – also affects the rest of Europe's security. That is why the work with the rule of law and democratic reforms continues to be important.

We know what it means when weak institutions create space for other forces – for organized crime, for Russian influence or for political extremism.

There has also sometimes been a naivety in parts of Europe where people have spoken about security as something hard, something that only concerns military threats. We know that corruption, organized crime, and precisely weak institutions – we are working to make them stronger – tend to become security threats. We have, Madam Speaker, already made the mistake once in history of reacting too late to what is happening in the Balkans, and we must not make that mistake again.

Similarly, the situation in Azerbaijan is a cause for great concern. When members of the delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and I myself were declared unwelcome, persona non grata, in Azerbaijan, some of us probably saw it as a badge of honor. But it also says something about the situation in the country. Our commitment to democracy and the rule of law in Azerbaijan has not diminished. There are good reasons to continue following the developments closely.

Madam Speaker! Last but not least, rather most importantly: Ukraine. The war in Ukraine is, as we know, not just about Ukraine's survival or about a revanchist Russia. It is about which principles we have and are set to serve and defend in our part of the world. It is about whether countries should be able to be invaded simply because they have a neighbor that is larger or if military power should weigh heavier than international law. It is about whether power should precede justice or if justice should precede power. And it is about whether democratic countries should be able to defend themselves without the rest of the world losing its endurance. That is why the support for Ukraine must continue in the long term – militarily, economically and politically.

Today, when Volodymyr Zelenskyy is in Sweden for a meeting with Ulf Kristersson regarding our continued support for Ukraine, this deserves to be pointed out further. Sweden stands side by side and shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine until the day that Ukraine has won the war.

That is why the question of the international tribunal also becomes important. There must, Madam Speaker, be a legal accountability for the crime of aggression against Ukraine. The Swedish government has been proactive in this issue. There are no major party-political differences in opinions regarding this. The Riksdag is expected to vote on the question of the tribunal in June. At that time, we will also be at the forefront in Europe in this regard.

I would like to thank the delegation – the chairperson, the vice-chairperson and the other members. I would especially like to thank the officials who, with accuracy, help us in the very best way to carry out our work in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and in the Swedish delegation to the same.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.

Madam Speaker! Sometimes questions about democracy and human rights are described as soft issues, as something that is a bit secondary and that can easily be blown away in the wind and brushed aside when other things demand attention. They are not soft issues. They are absolutely crucial issues. When democracies stop defending their institutions, they quickly become weak. Then society rots and trust decays from the inside. Then the trust between people is eroded.

That is why Sweden is, and shall be, a strong voice in the world and in the Council of Europe – not because the resolutions that we debate with all our might perhaps change the world overnight, but because the debate and the direction matter and because Europe needs more countries that dare to be clear when others hesitate. Here, Sweden shows the way.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 3 June.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)