Criminalization of virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions

Sanna Backeskog (S)

Madam Speaker! Honor-based oppression has no place in Sweden. Honor-related violence and oppression means that people – primarily girls and women but also boys, men, and hbtqi-persons – are restricted in their lives and subjected to pressure and violence aimed at maintaining the family's control over the individual. The one who challenges or defies the prevailing norm is considered to bring shame upon the entire family and risks being punished so that the family can regain what is perceived as lost honor.

Madam Speaker! Every girl and boy has the right to decide over their own body and their own life. There is no room for compromise here. Everyone in Sweden shall be allowed to marry whoever they want, dress how they want, and be themselves. Honor-related violence and oppression must cease, and society must react against all forms of honor-related violence and oppression.

During the Socialdemokraternas time in government, a number of important steps were taken regarding both increased penalties and preventive work. Today, representatives from the Committee on Justice are debating a bill to criminalize innocence checks, certificates of innocence, and innocence interventions. It is yet another issue this mandate period where the previous government commissioned an inquiry to achieve an important gender equality policy change and where the current government has now taken the inquiry's proposals further and is presenting a bill before the Riksdag.

Since I am first in the debate, I want to briefly describe what the proposals are about. It is proposed that from December 1, 2025, it shall be a criminal offense to examine someone else's female genitalia for the purpose of performing so-called virginity checks, to certify that someone else has or has not had vaginal intercourse, and to perform procedures on someone else's female genitalia for the purpose of making it appear that the person has not had vaginal intercourse. Consent from the girl or woman shall not exempt from liability. It will now also be a criminal offense to fail to disclose or prevent forced marriage and child marriage crimes.

This is good. It is a clear signal and a position that this type of oppressive control of women and children cannot be accepted by any party in the Swedish Riksdag.

To you who are watching this debate and who are yourself vulnerable or know someone you are worried about, I want to say: Your body is yours alone. Your sexuality is yours alone. The decision of whether you want or do not want to marry someone is yours alone. You have the right to live your life in safety and freedom and to follow your dreams. Anyone who tries to control you otherwise is committing a crime.

Madam Speaker! A central issue for maintaining honor-related oppression and the norm of virginity against girls and women concerns the requirement for bleeding on the wedding night. The issue of virginity checks, virginity operations, forced marriages, and child marriages has been repeatedly highlighted through, among other things, media reports. It is actually completely shocking when we receive and witness that this is happening quite openly in society.

Here in the Swedish Riksdag, through our gender equality policy goals, we have established everyone's right to equal health and every individual's right and opportunity to bodily integrity. We in the Swedish Riksdag must always stand up for the fact that both child marriage and forced marriage, as well as the control of a girl's or woman's so-called virginity, violate our fundamental and democratic freedoms and rights. We need to stand up for that.

Madam Speaker! Before the work on this bill began, I contacted a social services worker from my home county and asked to sit down with her and hear more about her many years of experience working with boys and girls who are in structures with strong honor where the norm of virginity is strong. She told me about girls who do not cycle, who do not jump, and who do not want to participate in sports at school for fear that a fictitious – invented – hymen will be damaged.

She told about how the norm of innocence can affect a girl's entire life – that is, something that does not exist! She told about how her work against honor control also involves teaching in biology and sex education and about how, with all the tools she has, she tries to enable the boys and girls she meets to both understand the purely physical, scientific, and also try to instill self-confidence, hope and a belief in a free, independent life.

To the question of what she wanted me to put forward in this debate, she first answered that it is completely correct to criminalize this for the individual's right to redress. It is also about norm-building, and it is a clear signal to all those who come into contact with the boys, girls, and women who are subjected to the innocence norm and forced marriage to really take this problem seriously.

In addition to that, she wanted, in total agreement with very many of the investigation's referral bodies, to include three things: education, education and education.

The National Centre for Women's Peace, NCK, writes, for example, in its referral response: "The important work with norm changes regarding the issue must not be negatively affected or deprioritized because a legislative change has been made."

Knowledge needs to be raised in healthcare, among preschool staff and school staff, and in social services. This also applies, of course, to those who live in an oppressive honor culture and those who contribute to upholding it. For every repressive initiative we make, we must meet it with a preventive one.

With that said, I feel that I want to conclude the speech in this debate on a high note by saying that I know it is possible to change these perceptions surrounding honor and the myth of innocence, because we are doing it in Gävle through Shanazi heroes.

Shanazi's heroes are the role models who dare to see, hear, and act to together create an equal society free from honor-related violence and oppression. Through both education and work with role models, the heroes want to strengthen young boys and girls living in an honor context.

Shanazi heroes are something one has to apply to be a part of. For one year, they work extremely hard with group processes while simultaneously being educated in equality, human rights, democracy, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. They shall then act as positive role models among their peers in, for example, schools and at youth centers. And it works! The University of Gävle has researched the activity and the work and has demonstrated very positive effects.

As one of the heroes expressed when they were visiting here in the Riksdag: If you are out at sea with a boat and the boat breaks down, you have to take the boat ashore to be able to repair it – and Shanazi is land for us.

We Social Democrats want to see a national preventive program that targets young people who find themselves in contexts where structures and norms surrounding honor are defining.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I also want to emphasize something that I think is very good about this decision, and that is that we do not criminalize the one who asks for a certificate of virginity or undergoes a so-called virginity operation. Instead, it is the one who performs the check, writes the certificate, or performs the operation who is the one committing a crime. In this way, we mark that we see the phenomenon for what it is – an oppression and a control of women's and girls' bodies, as well as a patriarchal, outdated, and unscientific view of the norm of virginity. The vulnerable person can never be the guilty one. It is an important principle that I hope we can all in the Swedish Riksdag stand behind.

(Applause)

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

Helena Vilhelmsson (C)

Madam Speaker! Members and listeners! Today we are debating and will make decisions regarding the criminalization of virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions, as well as the failure to disclose or prevent forced marriage and child marriage. In my speech, I will touch upon the issues of virginity.

I welcome this proposal very much. These phenomena are based on a deeply problematic view of girls' and women's freedom and independence. They are based on norms and ideals that girls and women should be virgins when they enter into marriage – as if someone other than the woman herself has anything to do with it.

All of this is unworthy of Sweden in 2025. Nevertheless, we know that it occurs. The investigation that preceded this proposition established that all these three phenomena occur in Sweden. There is a demand for healthcare to provide them, and it has emerged that innocence checks and innocence interventions are performed within both public and private healthcare as well as the private sphere.

People in general surely ask themselves if this has really been permitted until now. No, it has not. Within the Health and Medical Services Act and the Patient Safety Act, it is established that staff shall perform their work based on science and proven experience, and we know that it is not possible through a medical examination to determine whether a girl or woman has had sexual intercourse or not. You know – the myth of the hymen.

If this still occurs today, the idea is that a system of accountability within healthcare should kick in. It should be able to lead to, for example, fines, closure of operations, and revocation of licenses for, for example, doctors. But that has, therefore, not helped. We know that it has occurred anyway.

It can be stated that the issuance of certificates of innocence has, in principle, not resulted in any consequences for any healthcare provider or healthcare personnel. There is no documented case that has resulted in a probationary period or revocation of the license for any doctor. This legislation is therefore important. A criminal law tightening was needed, that is, that this enters the Penal Code.

Madam Speaker! I want to make a half-halt here and reflect on the fact that, despite everything, a lot has happened over time in the work against honor-related violence and oppression, HRV. The Centre Party has always stood on the barricades; not least did we, via the January Agreement, implement many stricter penalties and legislative changes.

There was, however, a time when we as a legislative assembly were divided and did not quite know how we should approach this custom, which so strongly restricts the freedom of girls and women. That we today decide on a criminalization of virginity tests shows that we have made a journey.

It is a journey that was largely initiated and driven by Amineh Kakabaveh, former Member of Parliament and chair of the Riksdag's cross-party network against discrimination and oppression in the name of honor. She negotiated the investigation directives with the government at the time. As the current chair of this network, I say: Well done, Amineh – now we have reached the harbor!

It will now be a criminal offense to perform innocence checks or issue certificates of innocence, regardless of whether it is claimed that consent exists or not. Here we have an important difference from how it works today: Even if the woman says that it is voluntary – which it naturally is not – it will still not be permitted by law to perform a check on whether she has had sexual intercourse or not. It is a very important signal to the woman herself and to everyone else – to healthcare providers, to relatives, and to the environment that has influenced the woman.

Virginity assault, perhaps the most egregious of these three occurrences, is an intervention intended to make it appear as though you have not had sexual intercourse even though you have. To clarify the horrific nature of this practice, I would like to read from the report. It can, therefore, involve stitches placed in the vaginal opening, a construction of a hymen, or a "narrowing" of the vagina. These are such improbable concepts that I have actually used quotation marks in my speech script, but this has indeed occurred.

I envision a campaign that Socialstyrelsen starts to put a stop to this, called MMM – motverka myten om mödomshinnan. I promise that I would gladly become an ambassador for that campaign.

Madam Speaker! However, the fact is that legislation does not solve all problems. The Government argues that there is no need for the Health and Social Services Inspectorate, IVO, to review its working methods to counter innocence checks, innocence certificates, and innocence interventions in a better way than today. I am of a completely different opinion.

Firstly: As mentioned, the current accountability system has not led to either a probationary period or a revocation of the license for any doctor. In fact, only a few cases of criticism have been directed at healthcare personnel and facilities that have issued certificates of innocence. There is only one case at Ivo regarding innocence interventions, and it is not yet resolved. Nevertheless, the government says that Ivo does not need to review its working methods to detect and counteract more cases. In that case, one truly trusts that the legislation will work miracles.

Secondly: The reasons why it was not needed are said to be that Ivo works risk-based, which means that a check is performed, among other things, after received tips, complaints, and deficiencies. It concerns tips from patients, users, and healthcare and care providers. But wait now – it is not the case that a girl or woman who has been forced to perform an innocence check the next day calls the police and says "Hello, I have been subjected to an innocence check!". She is probably too afraid of that. Nor is it the case that the doctor who performs this the next day calls and says "Hello, yesterday I committed a criminal act!".

The public and the media are also mentioned as potential informants, as are the courts, but they hardly know that it is occurring until it is too late.

The Government argues that Ivo always takes tasks regarding innocence checks, certificates of innocence, and innocence interventions very seriously. The Government also places the responsibility for reporting irregularities on patients and healthcare providers – perhaps the same healthcare provider who has committed the criminal act. I quote from the report:

"Patients and their relatives can also notice irregularities, but that requires them to first understand that the measures are unauthorized. A particular difficulty when it concerns virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions is that the patient or their relatives rarely have grounds to lodge a complaint. Furthermore, doctors or other healthcare personnel often lack incentives to document the measures."

The government does not, however, think that any new strategy is needed to counter this. I mean that the healthcare system's regulatory framework, supervision, and sanction possibilities have not been sufficient to guarantee the rights expressed in the Patient Safety Act. Nothing says either that it will become easier just because the new legislation is put in place.

I naturally view it positively that the relevant actors are given an information and training mandate linked to the new legislation – it is a must – but it is not the same as systematically changing the way of working regarding the supervision of how the same legislation is followed. Therefore, I believe that Ivo needs to be given a specific assignment to review his way of working in order to counter innocence checks, innocence certificates, and innocence interventions and thereby ensure that the implementation of the new legislation has an effect.

Madam Speaker! I move for the reservation to be approved.

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

Pontus Andersson Garpvall (SD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Justice's report Criminalization of innocence checks, certificates of innocence, and innocence interventions. I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the proposal in the bill.

Before this debate, I took the opportunity to search through Aftonbladet's archives to find articles where innocence checks were mentioned. The very earliest I found was an article from 2002 concerning the murder of Fadime, which is one of the first and most widely written about honor killings in Swedish history. In the years that have followed since then, honor culture, honor violence, and honor killings have been widely written about and debated.

From the side of several parties and politicians, however, the issue of honor culture was initially denied, minimized, or belittled. The fact that the term balcony girls has been established as a consequence of young women being killed by being pushed from balconies shows how far the problems have been allowed to go in Sweden. We did not have to have it this way.

From the left side of politics, it was early refused to speak about this as a cultural issue. The former left leader Gudrun Schyman spoke about how it was not about a cultural phenomenon but about an order where men oppress women. The same year she said it was the same norm, the same structure and the same pattern that was repeated in the Taliban's Afghanistan as in Sweden, as if it were about the same struggle.

The Sweden Democrats, for example, have for a long time pursued the issue of a ban on niqab and burka in the public sphere in Sweden. These garments exist to control women and uphold honor norms. As recently as last week, when the Christian Democrats proposed the same thing, the left-wing leader – this time Nooshi Dadgostar – mocked that Ebba Busch certainly doesn't like people wearing jeans in the Riksdag chamber either, as if it were the same thing.

Thus, the leader of the Green Party, Daniel Helldén, defends the wearing of the niqab and burka because he does not believe that clothing items should be banned – as if this were about any clothing items whatsoever.

These are clear examples that one is not prepared to take a firm stand against the culture of honor.

Regarding the issue we are debating today, namely innocence checks, the debate gained momentum around 2015. Since then, this phenomenon has become increasingly established in Swedish parallel societies. I have previously pointed out that this has been denied, downplayed, and diminished by certain parties. Against the background that we had a left-wing government for seven years after the debate gained momentum, it is quite obvious that a right-wing government together with the Sverigedemokraterna was required for this to be criminalized. I am, however, pleased that there is now a broad consensus on banning this cultural custom.

Let me now give a clear statement: Not all cultures are of equal value. Not all are equally good. The different Western cultures are superior to both the Islamist societies and the clan societies in the Middle East and Africa. This can be easily fact-checked by studying statistics on economic prosperity, democracy, human rights, and equality.

It is not just chance that has made it this way. It has to do with older Swedes' efforts in work and entrepreneurship and in the home, as well as with previous generations' efforts in the same areas. If one does not understand that some cultures are better than others and instead sees the honor culture as a general patriarchal issue, where women in Sweden face the same struggle as women in Afghanistan or Somalia, it is also difficult to understand why certain cultural phenomena should not be permitted in Sweden.

The question of innocence checks and the prohibition of these would not have had to be relevant in Sweden if Sweden had not become the society that previous politicians created. Immigration from the Middle East and Africa has brought with it cultures that are completely incompatible with a Western society. The culture of honor, with control over girls and women, is part of this backward culture.

Madam Speaker! Today we are criminalizing virginity checks, virginity certificates, and virginity procedures. The bill comes from a right-wing government with the support of the Sweden Democrats. All these four parties are prepared to take these problems seriously and do what is required to stand up for all girls and women who are subjected to these outdated cultural elements.

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

Ludvig Ceimertz (M)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating a bill that aims at four phenomena: virginity checks, certificates of virginity, virginity interventions, and the failure to disclose or prevent child marriages.

Virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions are not medical acts, Madam Speaker, but they are abuses and should be treated as abuses. They are violations of privacy, completely lack a scientific basis, and can have lifelong consequences for the girls who are subjected to them.

The Government therefore proposes in its bill that these acts shall be criminalized both within and outside of health and medical care, which is important. Regardless of whether there is consent or not, it shall be criminalized to perform this type of checks and interventions and to issue this type of certificates. Anyone who performs a virginity check or a virginity intervention shall be liable to imprisonment.

In the proposition, we also propose a liability for omission in cases of forced or child marriage. The person who has concrete knowledge that a child is at risk of being married off but chooses to turn a blind eye can be held accountable. The person who can act and is in the child's vicinity must be able to act, Madam Speaker, because we know that it is often precisely the silence, the loyalty, and the fear that cause young girls to be left alone when they need help the most. With this law, we draw the line. Turning a blind eye when a child is to be married off is no longer acceptable, but it becomes punishable. It becomes a duty to act.

Madam Speaker! This is part of the government's broad work against honor oppression. Since we took office, we have step by step built a stronger protection. There are studies that indicate that up to 240,000 young people in Sweden live under honor oppression. In a study in Botkyrka, over 40 percent of girls in ninth grade stated that they are worried that someone else will decide their future partner. This is not about marginal problems but about a systematic oppression of primarily young girls that is taking place here and now in Sweden.

It is a great betrayal that we have not acted earlier. What we do here today we should have done a long time ago.

The work of building a stronger protection against honor oppression is a whole. It is not about point interventions but about a large task in several areas. This is one of many important parts, but we must move forward with a whole.

This government is moving forward with several measures.

Among other things, the government is proposing a ban on cousin marriage, which has been called a genuine "shit issue" by leading Social Democrats. But we know that cousin marriage is often used as part of the honor culture to keep families together, control girls' lives, and transfer honor norms to the next generation. Therefore, the government proposes that cousin marriage should be prohibited in Swedish law and that foreign cousin marriages should not be recognized. This is a stand against the structures that uphold honor oppression and a way to protect children and young people from coercion.

The government is also tightening the legislation against forced and child marriages. We have seen how perpetrators have tried to circumvent the law by moving the act to other countries or by calling it something else. Therefore, the government is tightening the legislation so that it applies not only to the marriage but also to preparations and attempts and to taking someone abroad to be married off. This allows the state to intervene earlier.

Madam Speaker! The Government also protects children through more extensive travel restrictions. We know that girls risk being sent abroad under the pretext of holidays or family visits, but in reality, they are to be married off or, in the worst case, subjected to female genital mutilation. The Government has given the country's municipalities and social welfare boards the opportunity to stop this through more extensive travel bans, because children should not have to board a plane knowing that they will never again be able to decide over their own lives. It is a concrete tool that is already being used and which has had a great effect. Many children have been prevented from being taken abroad. This is positive, but it is not enough.

The government is also tightening the legislation against female genital mutilation. It is one of the most severe abuses that can be committed against girls. The government has clarified that Swedish law applies even if the procedure is committed abroad, and the penalties have been increased. Those who commit this crime shall not be able to hide behind borders, traditions, or silence.

The government has also adopted a comprehensive action program, Free and Safe without Violence and Oppression. It takes a holistic approach with over a hundred measures. As previously mentioned, this cannot be handled with point interventions; instead, a holistic approach is required.

Madam Speaker! Honor oppression has no place in Sweden and conflicts with everything Sweden stands for. We are a country that shall build on equality and the individual's freedom. Girls and women shall not be controlled by their family, reduced to their family's honor, or forced into marriage against their will. They shall have the same right as everyone else to go to school, meet friends, dream about the future, and choose their partner. In Sweden, girls are no one's property but individuals with a right to freedom and integrity.

The government's bill is an important step in that direction. Innocence checks, certificates of innocence, and innocence interventions are criminalized. Liability for omission to stop child marriages is introduced. The whole is strengthened through a ban on cousin marriages, travel bans for children, stricter laws against female genital mutilation, and a comprehensive action program against violence and oppression. The government does this so that every child, every girl, and every woman shall know that the state stands on their side, not the perpetrators'.

Madam Speaker! Sweden shall be a country where children grow up free from honor oppression, where children do not have to worry and where the laws are sharp, the support strong and the message clear: Honor oppression does not belong in our country.

(Applause)

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

Kajsa Fredholm (V)

Madam Speaker! Innocence checks, certificates of innocence, and innocence interventions occur in Sweden, but of course, they should not occur at all. They are serious violations of, above all, the rights of women and girls and can lead to serious physical and mental injuries for those affected. Therefore, the Left Party agrees that the protection for girls and women living in a context of honor needs to be strengthened.

Honor-related violence and oppression, as well as men's violence against women in general, have their basis in gender, sexuality, power, and cultural perceptions of these phenomena. This is a violence and oppression that Vänsterpartiet considers must be fought with force. The honor-related system is complex and contains a number of oppressive forms of a structural and organized nature.

Madam Speaker! The specific thing about honor violence is that it is exercised with the help of collective control mechanisms, which are often sanctioned by relatives and the surrounding community. It is primarily girls and young women who are affected by honor-related violence and oppression, but boys and young men are also exposed.

Society must do significantly more to detect early on when someone is being victimized and offer long-term support. Unfortunately, we have seen that, for example, the social services many times fail to offer long-term and supportive interventions. This may be because the social services are too pressured by economic and personnel reasons. The school also has an important task to fulfill when it comes to detecting and seeing warning signs early.

The government's current bill focuses on criminal law measures – something that the Left Party welcomes, and we support the bill in its entirety. When it comes to the concrete legislative proposals, I believe that the criminalization of virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions is a particularly urgent measure to strengthen the protection of girls and women.

Madam Speaker! On the other hand, it has not been as obvious to support the proposal to criminalize the failure to disclose or prevent forced marriage and child marriage crimes. I want to clarify that Vänsterpartiet has long pushed for a total ban on child marriage and forced marriage. There must, of course, be zero tolerance towards both child marriage and forced marriages. In Sweden, there is no general duty to report or intervene against crimes, but there is, however, an obligation to report certain ongoing serious crimes. Furthermore, certain professional groups have a duty to report committed crimes. This primarily applies to officials within authorities who work with children and who, in the event of a failure to report, can be guilty of professional misconduct. Many of these professional groups also, according to the Social Services Act, have a reporting obligation in cases of suspicion that a child is being harmed.

Madam Speaker! I further note that attempts, preparation and stamping for forced marriage and child marriage, as well as misleading regarding a marriage trip, are already punishable. The provisions on complicity in crime in the Penal Code are also applicable, which means that assistance in the various preparatory moments is punishable.

Vänsterpartiet has, however, chosen not to reserve itself against the government's bill in this part. It is, however, very important that the new crime of omission is not applied in such a way that it practically becomes a matter of a reporting system. We will follow the issue closely and, if necessary, return with proposals for measures.

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

Torsten Elofsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the government's bill and the committee's proposal in the report in its entirety.

Today we are debating a phenomenon that should be eradicated in a modern and enlightened society. We are talking about an oppression of girls and women who are not allowed to choose partners and who are restricted and monitored in their daily lives. To preserve the family's honor, they are required to practice restraint and chastity. They are not allowed, like other girls and women, to develop their love lives and their sexuality, something that others see as a natural part of the path to adulthood.

Unfortunately, several women have had to give their lives when they tried to break free from a paralyzing culture of honor with a desire for independence and the opportunity to choose their own partners. We remember Pela and Fadime.

Madam Speaker! We also remember Shahida, whose friends have told of her struggle to live a life she had chosen for herself, not one dictated by her family and their honor norms. She lived in a prison. She saw how other girls her age lived, and she also wanted that. She wanted to be free. Shahida was found dead in a windbreak outside Lessebo, murdered by her father and older brother. Reason: Shahida had married a man who was not accepted by the family.

These are just a few examples where the requirement of virginity is a fundamental part of the honor context. To ensure that the girl or woman is untouched, the family requires proof of this. In healthcare, it still occurs that staff perform virginity checks and surgical procedures on girls and young women to "restore" the vagina after sexual intercourse, so-called hymen reconstruction. For everyone, it is obvious that this is a deeply violating treatment of girls and women and their integrity.

In a study published by Archives of Sexual Behavior, the women state that it could feel safer to undergo an operation instead of risking their lives if it were to come out that they had had sexual intercourse. But the participants also questioned that doctors performed the procedures, and indeed it is strange that there are doctors who are prepared to issue certificates of virginity, despite knowledge that it is not possible to determine during a medical examination whether a girl or woman has had sexual intercourse.

It is frightening, Madam Speaker, that this occurs today in our Sweden. Such an examination is not in accordance with science and proven experience and violates the Patient Safety Act. It is clear that such examinations, which convey a false notion that the girl or woman has an intact hymen, which therefore lacks a scientific basis, are not compatible with Swedish law. Doctors who participate in such procedures and issue certificates of virginity do so in violation of good medical ethics.

Madam Speaker! At its core, the view on a woman's innocence is about values that do not belong in our country. The notion that the family's honor is linked to girls' and women's genitals is and should be completely foreign in a modern and equal society. It cannot be negotiable. We Christian Democrats strongly oppose the honor oppression that affects girls and young women and which violates their integrity.

The criminalization of virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions that is now being introduced is welcome, and we should all work to ensure that this violation and limitation of women's freedom and emotional lives ceases. It is, as said, an oppression that does not belong in a modern and enlightened society, and current sanctions are insufficient.

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

Ulrika Westerlund (MP)

Madam Speaker! Honor-related violence and oppression are about the control and restriction of a person's freedom of action, the right to one's own body, and the right to choose one's own partner. It can manifest in the form of child or forced marriage, female genital mutilation of girls and women, physical and psychological violence, or restrictions in the form of control over social interactions and clothing choices. It can also be about the victim not being allowed to choose education or work outside the home, or about their social media being monitored.

The person who openly challenges or defies prevailing norms of honor is often considered to bring shame upon the entire family and risks being punished physically, mentally and/or socially so that the family can restore the honor perceived as lost.

Honor-related violence and oppression often affect young women, but it is important to remember that other groups can also be exposed. Young men can also be restricted, not least when choosing a partner, and hbtqi persons can be targeted in order to prevent us from living our lives in accordance with our sexual orientation, our gender identity, or our gender expression.

In the government, the Green Party was involved in taking several steps to strengthen the work against honor-related violence and oppression. We introduced a basis for increased penalties for honor crimes and made it possible to better protect children from being taken out of the country to, for example, enter into child marriages. We established a national competence center against honor-related violence and oppression and contributed to the introduction of honor oppression as a specific crime, from June 1 of this year. But there is much left to do.

We welcome that the government is now taking the work of combating honor-related violence and oppression further. So-called virginity checks, certificates of virginity, and virginity interventions constitute a serious violation of girls' and young women's right to their integrity and their private lives. That the government is now introducing a new penal provision establishing criminal liability for these types of interventions can contribute to combating the harmful and restrictive norms that they uphold. Now it is a matter of us jointly ensuring that the legislation becomes sufficient and effective and contributes to real change.

Madam Speaker! The investigation that forms the basis for the proposal to criminalize innocence checks, certificates of innocence, and innocence interventions, which we are debating here today, received an additional directive in the summer of 2022 to also look at the need to criminalize conversion attempts of hbtqi persons. The directive was received after a report from the Agency for Youth and Civil Society Issues had shown that this is something that occurs in Sweden to a non-negligible extent, depending on the definition of conversion attempts.

Unfortunately, the investigation chose not to propose that conversion attempts should be criminalized, with reference to the fact that much of what can constitute conversion attempts is already criminalized, for example, assault and unlawful coercion. Miljöpartiet believes that this is unfortunate, and we want to point out that the very existence of a conversion crime could have a normalizing effect, just like the other prohibitions that we are discussing here today. It must be signaled how seriously the legislator views forced attempts to change or suppress a person's sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.

The government has chosen to place the prohibition against conversion attempts under an upcoming special penal provision on psychological violence. It aims for conversion attempts under threat or coercion to potentially be covered by the proposed provision. The proposal has been out for consultation.

We in Miljöpartiet see risks with conversion attempts only falling under the provision on psychological violence. Our primary concern is that the regulation will not be sufficiently accurate and that certain forms of conversion attempts fall outside the provision on psychological violence. The normative effect risks being lost. That is why we want to designate it as a specific crime, just like the one we are discussing here today.

The Green Party's view is that conversion attempts are an expression of honor-related violence and oppression in the same way as virginity checks, virginity certificates, and virginity interventions. However, conversion attempts sometimes occur in contexts that are not usually perceived as honor-related violence and oppression but which have many similarities.

In conclusion, I want to emphasize that criminalization is not the only thing required to combat honor-related violence and oppression. For legislative changes and stricter laws to have an impact, preventive measures are required, at the very least, to prevent children and young people from being subjected to crimes. Miljöpartiet wants to establish resource centers in every county to increase access to help for those at risk and develop how authorities cooperate regarding families.

The importance of increased knowledge and competence among children, parents, and professionals within school, social services, and health and medical care is crucial. With increased awareness, we can contribute to creating safe environments where vulnerable individuals gain insight into their situation and dare to speak out to receive support and help.

(Applause)

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

Helene Odenjung (L)

Madam Speaker! Being last in this chamber debate feels a bit special. On the one hand, I am glad that we are now so much in agreement. On the other hand, I am a bit sad – or angry, actually – that it has taken so long.

The Liberals have long championed the work against honor-related violence and oppression. In the beginning, we were quite alone and had to work against the wind, but that has not stopped us. I would like to take this opportunity to extend a warm thank you to Nyamko Sabuni, Gulan Avci, Robert Hannah and Juno Blom but also to Nalin Pekgul and Amineh Kakabaveh. This legislation could have been in place a long time ago if more people had listened to you earlier.

Now we face a decisive decision in this issue, a decision that is about protecting girls' and women's right to their bodies, their freedom, and their future. We have debated the criminalization of virginity checks, virginity certificates, and virginity interventions, acts that are deeply rooted in honor norms and which do not belong in a modern, equal, and free society.

The Liberals have, as said, fought for a long time for Sweden to be a country where every individual has the right to decide over their own life, where no one should have to undergo an "investigation" or intervention to prove their innocence and where no one should be forced to live under threat of violence, exclusion or control just because she is a woman – or at all, in fact. It is a lack of freedom that society must combat at all costs.

Madam Speaker! The National Board of Health and Welfare states that virginity checks and certificates of virginity lack a medical basis and violate Swedish law. Nevertheless, they occur – both within healthcare and in private contexts. In some cases, girls are sent abroad to undergo virginity procedures, which can lead to lifelong physical and psychological trauma. We must not accept this.

Save the Children has collected stories from young people who have lived under honor oppression. A girl tells: "The little freedom I had disappeared the day I got my period." A boy tells: "I lost my little sister." These are not just individual voices and testimonies. These are not just numbers in the statistics. These are real people, and their testimonies demand political action to prevent more from being subjected to this.

Madam Speaker! The bill proposes three new criminal classifications: innocence check, which can lead to imprisonment for a maximum of one year, certification of sexual innocence, which can lead to a fine or imprisonment for a maximum of six months, and innocence violation, which is included in the laws against female genital mutilation.

Furthermore, it is proposed that failure to disclose or prevent forced or child marriages shall become punishable. It is an important step to break the culture of silence surrounding honor-based oppression.

The Liberals have long been proactive and therefore welcome these proposals. We have dared to speak plainly about honor culture when other parties have not wanted to see or understand the problem and have failed to take the lack of freedom seriously. It has sometimes been lonely, but it has not hindered us.

In order to more easily detect honor violence, the entire society needs to work actively, consciously, and preventatively. Several organizations have already developed routines to identify those who visit, for example, healthcare to manage injuries linked to violence and oppression in everyday life. These routines need to be spread to the entire country.

The Liberals want to see a broad national strategy against honor oppression with education, support for the vulnerable, and clear guidelines for healthcare, school, and the justice system. Staff must always ask questions to detect all forms of exposure to violence.

Madam Speaker! This is not just a legal or medical issue. It is a question of which community of values we want to belong to and what kind of society we want to create. The norms and values of the culture of honor take away from girls, boys, and hbtqi-persons their fundamental freedoms and rights: the right to own their lives and decide over their bodies.

We liberals will never give up the fight for every person's freedom. Breaking the honor-related oppression is one of our time's greatest equality issues. Everyone should be free to love whom they want and live the life they want – without fear of reprisals.

By voting yes to this bill, we strengthen the protection and support for the most vulnerable. We put a stop to abuses that have long been able to occur in silence. We take a stand – for freedom, for integrity, and for human rights.

It is time to move from words to action. This bill does just that. It does not only criminalize actions; it challenges norms. It says that society does not accept pseudoscience, patriarchal control, or cultural perceptions that violate an individual's freedom. It says that consent under pressure is not consent – that a girl who agrees to a virginity test does so because she is afraid, not because she is free.

Madam Speaker! We Liberals will vote yes to this proposition to break norms, to protect girls, and to defend freedom.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 17.)

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