Human rights

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are to debate the report UU14 on human rights. It is unfortunately an increasingly pressing issue in these days with war, conflicts, and a large number of hotspots in our surrounding world. Authoritarian forces are on the advance and democracy is in retreat in several parts of the world, even in our own neighborhoods in Europe.

I would like to begin by moving for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

Democracy, respect for human rights and the principles of the rule of law are cornerstones in Swedish foreign policy, and we know that it is the basis for peace and security. At the same time, we live in a time when reports are repeatedly presented regarding violations of human rights, increased corruption, diminished media freedom, reduced rights for national minorities, restrictions on religious freedom, and a regression of women's and girls' rights.

For security and stability in the world around us, it is crucial that the rules-based world order, international law, and respect for the UN Charter are upheld. Human freedoms and rights must be defended. Every individual's equal value regardless of gender, age, sexual orientation, or religion is a matter of freedom. Several religious minority groups, for example Christians and Uyghurs, are subjected to oppression all around the world.

It is worrying when human rights, our common rules, are undermined by authoritarian states such as Russia, China, and Iran, which want to reshape and restrict these rights based on their own value systems. The UN continues to have a central role in work on global issues, and the Swedish government will continue to pursue Swedish foreign policy interests with the commitment within the UN as an important platform.

Mr. Speaker! Dark clouds hang heavy over several places in the world and not just on the horizon. Let me begin in our absolute immediate vicinity. Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has resulted in the rules-based world order being disrupted. The European security order with its broad perspective on security no longer applies.

We can repeatedly witness how Russia commits serious violations of international humanitarian law through attacks against civilians, torture, sexual violence, forced displacement and deportation of civilians, including many children, all in the wake of the horrors of war.

To take children away against their will and the family's approval is a serious violation of human rights. Sweden is in contact with the organization The Reckoning Project, which collects evidence and provides support to journalists and lawyers for the investigation of cases concerning forcibly displaced and deported Ukrainian children. In this way, Sweden contributes to trying to help and bring home the thousands of Ukrainian children who have been forcibly displaced or deported to Russia.

In August last year, I visited Ukraine at the invitation of Ukraine's Speaker. One of the meetings that we in the delegation had was with Ukraine's Prosecutor General. That Sweden demands accountability for Russia's serious violations is an important part of Sweden's powerful and long-term support for Ukraine.

Sweden is also working together with other countries to establish a tribunal for the Russian crime of aggression against Ukraine. Sweden has allocated funds to MSB, the Swedish Defence Preparedness Agency, to be able to support Ukraine, partly through resources that strengthen the technical capacity of Ukrainian authorities to investigate war crimes.

War crimes must be prosecuted. The International Criminal Court ICC is tasked with investigating and judging when it comes to international war crimes, but Russia's crimes against human rights in Ukraine are so extensive that further efforts are needed to secure evidence and carry out investigations of suspected crimes against international law committed during Russia's war.

Mr. Speaker! It is not possible to speak about the war against Ukraine without mentioning Belarus. The country is often described as Europe's last dictatorship. Belarus is geographically closer to Sweden than we often imagine - only 50 miles. That is a shorter distance than the distance between Malmö and Stockholm. We also see gross and serious restrictions of human freedoms and rights in Belarus. There are today almost 1,400 political prisoners in the country. Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, officially Belarus' leading opposition representative and by many referred to as Belarus' rightful president, now lives in Lithuania and works actively for a democratic Belarus after the unjust so-called presidential election in 2020.

Sweden advocates for further sanctions against the Belarusian regime due to both the repression in the country and its complicity in Russia's war against Ukraine. We support the Belarusian people on their path towards a free and democratic Belarus as part of the European family.

Mr. Speaker! On June 9, there is an election to the European Parliament. With war in Europe, it is one of the most important European elections in a long time. The EU's expansion, which has been intensified as a result of Russia's aggressive war against Ukraine, is a geostrategic investment in democracy, security, peace, stability, and prosperity. Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia have all applied for membership in the EU and been granted candidate status. It is in our interest to help the candidate countries approach the union. Membership in the EU means that respect for human rights increases both in the mentioned countries and in the region.

Mr. Speaker! Equality is a core value in Swedish foreign policy. We see how the global resistance against equality and SRHR is increasing. In countries such as Afghanistan and Iran, the foundation of the authoritarian regime is a comprehensive and systematic oppression of girls and women. To, as in Afghanistan, forbid girls from attending school from the age of eleven is a serious crime, a crime that affects these girls' opportunity for an independent life. But we also see it in countries like the USA, where a decision in the country's Supreme Court has resulted in several states making abortion illegal. In Europe, we see persecution and harassment against LGBTQ people and, not least, systematic sexual violence in the wake of the horrors of war in Ukraine.

In Sweden's foreign policy and in the aid agenda that Sweden is now developing, it is also clear that Sweden stands behind that we shall work for increased equality and for the freedom and rights of girls and women in the world.

Mr. Speaker! I will go over by a few minutes, and I apologize for that already now.

It is not possible to stand here in the speaker's chair today without mentioning the humanitarian situation in Gaza. It is alarming. The State of Israel is exercising its legal right to defend its population and its country after Hamas's barbaric attack against Israeli civilians on October 7. Documentation, largely filmed by the terrorist organization Hamas itself, shows horribly cruel atrocities, gang rapes, and a pure slaughter of innocent children, women, and the elderly. It is the largest pogrom against Jews we have seen since World War II.

At the same time, the situation for the civilian population in Gaza is becoming increasingly acute. Aid shipments are not arriving because access to the affected areas in Gaza is being closed.

Sweden and the EU see no other peaceful way forward than a negotiated two-state solution, where Israel and Palestine can coexist in peace and security. We have historically very close ties with Israel, which this government has rebuilt, and we have long-standing connections with Palestine. Swedish engagement in the region and with Israel is strong, and Sweden has clear expectations for the Palestinian Authority to condemn the terrorist organization Hamas as well as to take measures against corruption. Israel's right to exist as a state is indisputable.

At the same time, Israel must comply with the applicable international legal and international frameworks, address the unacceptable settler violence in the West Bank, and cease the expansion of settlements. The Government supports the work ongoing within the EU regarding a proposal to target sanctions against extremist settlers.

Mr. Speaker! I have no more time for my speech in the rostrum, but I shall conclude by mentioning China.

China is the world's second-largest economy and a technological leading nation. At the same time, the country still exercises authoritarian rule and has growing global ambitions.

China's actions towards Taiwan cause great concern, and threats of military violence are unacceptable. At regular intervals, the rest of the world is reached by appalling news about the situation in Tibet. There too, children are kidnapped and placed in so-called boarding schools with the aim of being converted into good Chinese citizens, and thereby they lose their Tibetan background.

If I had had more speaking time, I would also give many examples from Latin America. There, we can see a regression in several countries regarding human rights, the principles of the rule of law, and democracy.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden does not forget the political prisoners who are imprisoned in various places around the world, deprived of their freedom because they have spoken out against an authoritarian regime, because they have acted in opposition, and because they have stood up for human rights and freedom of expression. The Government will continue to work to achieve a release of the journalist Dawit Isaak, the publisher and poet Gui Minhai, and the EU official Johan Floderus. The Government is simultaneously working intensively on other consular cases where Swedish citizens have been deprived of their liberty on unreasonable grounds.

Democracy, human rights and the principles of the rule of law are values that Sweden stands behind and form the basis of our foreign policy. Sweden, the government, works to strengthen fundamental rights in accordance with the UN Charter. Therefore, it is important to work within international organizations such as the EU, UN, OSCE, OECD and the Council of Europe. No one can do everything alone, but together with others we can achieve changes so that more people in the world can live in freedom and express their opinions!

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for an engaged speech on human rights. The member exceeded his speaking time, and this is also an enormous area that deserves to be noticed, debated and discussed. It should be noticed given the restless development we see in the world regarding human rights.

A question in the report concerns ecocide. We Social Democrats, together with the Center Party, the Left Party, and the Green Party, are pushing for the issue of the crime of ecocide to be included in the Rome Statute so that states that commit gross crimes can be prosecuted.

I have noted the majority parties', the government parties' responses that they see our proposal as innovative, but they are not ready to take the step now. They also do not want to push the government to produce legislation. I see it as extremely important that we do not only ensure that states follow international law but that we also develop international law. A development of international law would be this.

We are often several parties in the Swedish Riksdag who join forces when it comes to issues concerning Russia's full-scale war in Ukraine. Russia did, after all, ensure that the Kakhovka Dam was blown up last year. It is an example of such a crime for which Russia can be held accountable.

I hereby pose the following question to Member Tolgfors: Why are you not willing to push the government forward and achieve the legislation that would be so important and involve a strengthening of international law regarding ecocide?

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Ecocide has received extra attention in the wake of Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine, but there are more examples in history. This applies, for example, to the war in the Balkans and also around the world.

In the Committee on Foreign Affairs during the spring, we received a submission from former Foreign Minister Margot Wallström on the issue of ecocide. She has also submitted a report to the government.

There is surely no one who does not think the report is very important. On the contrary, it is a report that I know the government is looking at. Foreign Minister Tobias Billström has also been clear that there is much in the report to take hold of, which is important and innovative. It will also be part of the continued support to Ukraine and the reconstruction work that is to take place. Sweden, through the EU, will be involved, and the issue of ecocide is part of the work. Just the fact that the Foreign Minister uses the word innovative, I interpret positively.

Tobias Billström has spoken about ecocide in the EU Committee, and he has mentioned that Sweden welcomes various processes in the area, not least in the bodies where we can work within the EU. Within the EU, it has also been agreed to strengthen the EU's environmental crime directive with provisions against environmental destruction.

I do not think the member should be worried about this, but here the government intends to continue the work and look at how Sweden can be an active party in the work. The EU Committee is informed and can follow the work that the government is doing in the area.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Tolgfors for the answer.

It is true that former Foreign Minister Margot Wallström visited the Committee on Foreign Affairs earlier this year. There, she presented the 50 recommendations that the high-level group has investigated regarding the consequences of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. One such recommendation was precisely the one that Member Tolgfors took up, namely that ecocide becomes a part of the Rome Statute. Thus, states can be held accountable for gross abuses and large-scale environmental destruction.

We are four parties in the Swedish Riksdag who are pushing for this. I appreciate that the member takes this to heart, and I hope that we, as in many other issues regarding Russia and Ukraine, can also join forces in this matter. I look forward to a continued dialogue, and I hope that the government takes the steps that our parties are pushing for in the Swedish Riksdag.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! These questions are absolutely important. We heard appalling figures when the consequences of the destruction of Russia's war ravages in Ukraine were addressed. They have effects on the biological and ecological environment and also incredible effects on Ukraine's opportunities for cultivation.

These are questions that are of interest not only for Ukraine but also for us others. We can support and help so that there can be a reconstruction. Above all, Russia must be held accountable and pay for the devastation they have caused. It is important to say.

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

Kerstin Lundgren (C)

Mr. Speaker! There is, of course, much that one can agree on. One such thing is to stand up for equality, which the member mentioned.

We have a requirement - and I will return to this - which concerns giving the foreign authorities a clear mandate to work with these issues and also the rights of hbtqi persons.

If we look at what is happening in the world, we can see that one first attacks hbtqi-persons. Then one will attack women. Hate crimes are increasing, and disinformation and accusations are growing. Then come prison sentences, and people are arrested or even murdered. One tries to change norms, from the individual to another level. That is what is happening now, and against that background, it would be valuable to see that Swedish foreign authorities have a clear mandate to work with these issues.

I am reading the committee majority's text, where it is referred to that "the activities of the foreign agencies on an overall level are governed by the common strategy for the foreign administration." I am curious to see where in the common strategy this is mentioned, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the member can inform us in what way this is addressed in the common strategy for the foreign agencies.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! As the member mentions, these are issues that are truly important to take care of. We see a worrying development - I mentioned it in my speech - with persecution and harassment against LGBTQ+ persons, dissenting voices, and so on.

When it comes to foreign authorities and taking care of this, I do not know if the member is referring to the fact that one has previously spoken about feminist foreign policy and had a different label on it. But in another part of foreign policy, namely the reform agenda, there is an entire strategy that deals with precisely equality, the rights of women and girls, and LGBTQ people.

In the overall foreign policy, it is very clear that the government works through and intends to continue working through the bodies where we are active in the UN, in the EU and in other organizations where we can exert influence.

Sweden's foreign authorities naturally play an important role, and in the regulatory letters that are issued and the mandates that the authorities have, this is part of the mandate from the overall foreign policy.

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

Kerstin Lundgren (C)

Mr. Speaker! My question concerned where it stands in the joint strategy that the committee refers to that the foreign authorities have this mandate. It is one thing to speak in general terms, but it is another thing to give a mandate.

I am not talking about feminist foreign policy per se. I am talking about a liberal foreign policy that sees the individual and that truly utilizes the fact that we have a hundred foreign missions that can work to make a difference in such a vulnerable situation.

Since you refer to this, my question is where it is stated in the strategy you refer to.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! We refer partly to the foreign policy declaration. Then, of course, it is also mentioned in the state budget.

I do not know what you mean if it is an exact directive to the foreign authorities, whether you mean the foreign authorities in general. Is it embassies, or what is it that you are requesting? Should it be addressed exactly to authorities, or is it generally an expenditure item or regulation for embassies abroad that the member is referring to?

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: That was a closing remark, and I must remind you that we do not use the address "you" in the chamber.)

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to the member for the speech!

I agree with much of what the member said regarding equality. But in line with Kerstin Lundgren, I call for clearer guidelines in the reform agenda for how that work should be carried out, as they are lacking.

But I actually requested the floor because of what the member said regarding Gaza. The member said that Israel has the right to defend itself. Then I wonder if the member considers the warfare that Israel is now waging against Gaza to be proportionate. Yes or no?

That so many civilians have been killed, over 34,000 of whom are women and children, that Israel prevents supplies from coming in, that we are facing a major famine catastrophe and that children have already died of starvation, is that proportionate? Does the member believe so?

Does the member believe that Israel has committed war crimes by killing as many civilians as it actually has in this war? In no war since World War II have so many children, journalists, aid workers and UN personnel been killed as in the war that is currently ongoing.

I would like to have answers to those questions.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thanks to the member for the questions!

In my speech, I began with October 7. What worries me is that in the debates we have had in the chamber over time since October 7, it is not exactly that event that I hear about from the opposition. You begin with Israel's right to defend itself and its country.

Of course Israel, which I also pointed out, must follow the international rules of law that apply. This the Swedish government has stated, and it is also my opinion.

When it comes to human rights, international law and so on, one must start by looking at the attack that was carried out against Israeli civilians. There, one can truly speak of abuses and disproportionality. But of course, the bodies whose task it is to look at this will have to investigate whether it is the case that Israel is committing abuses or violating international law rules. It is quite obvious, and it has been stated from the rostrum here but also by the government.

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Member Tolgfors!

Of course we must condemn Hamas's brutal attacks on Israeli civilians on October 7. I have done so myself many times in this rostrum. It was a horrific atrocity. But that does not justify what Israel is doing now, when they are in the process of punishing an entire population.

One must also remember that the history did not begin on October 7. Israel's illegal occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem began decades before that. The displacement of Palestinians, the illegal settlements, the apartheid wall - all of this began long before then. It does not justify Hamas, but one must remember it. The history did not begin on October 7.

The Leader of the Opposition says that Israel must follow international regulations, international law, and so on. I completely agree with that. But when it comes to the laws of war, it is obvious that Israel has not followed the laws of war. It is very clear. So many civilians, over 34,000, the majority of whom are women and children, would not have been killed if Israel had followed the laws of war.

After the Second World War, countries agreed that civilians should be protected in connection with warfare and that one is obliged to do so. But it is evident that Israel has not done so when so many civilians have lost their lives. Here, Israel has absolutely violated the laws of war, and therefore I think there is reason to convey that criticism against Israel in a clear and distinct way from the Swedish government. That they are preventing supplies from coming in is also evident, so here I would wish for greater clarity.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! I can repeat what I have said earlier. Sweden's government has stated that it is important that Israel, in its defense of its country and its people, which it has a right to, follows the existing rules of international law.

It does not fall to members of the Swedish Riksdag to judge this. There is talk of genocide from the left wing in debates and in the media. I believe one should be careful with that word. All wars are horrific and affect civilians.

When it comes to Gaza specifically, it is a geographically small area, and that of course makes the whole thing even more difficult and more complicated. But Sweden has increased its humanitarian aid to Gaza. The problem is that it is not getting through.

One also supports Israel's right to defend itself, but it must be proportionate and in accordance with the rules of international law. It cannot be any clearer than that.

One also supports the EU's line when it now concerns looking forward and trying to reach a two-state solution. But that negotiation unfortunately does not look like it is moving forward. Both parties must want this for their people. Hamas does not support the Palestinian people; they are terrorists.

But that the Swedish government stands behind Israel's right to defend itself within the framework of international law, that has been made very clear.

Since you also raised this regarding LGBTQI people, I would like to conclude by saying that this, as you know, is in the reform agenda. It is not completely finished yet, but now the last pieces of the puzzle are to be put in place. Those who are calling for more guidelines and wondering how this should be managed will therefore have to wait a little longer. A basis that has now been submitted is being investigated and analyzed. We know that civil society plays an important role, for example.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! Human rights are inextricably linked with democratic development, as democracy and human rights presuppose one another. Democracy must be social, and in order to ensure social rights, democracy is required.

Many of us probably raised our eyebrows a few days ago when we were presented with this year's press freedom index for Europe, and it turned out that only eight countries were judged to have full press freedom. Sweden is one of the eight countries together with Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland, Estonia, Portugal and Ireland. This is something we must safeguard and continue to ensure, because it is about our freedom of expression. The UN Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 also establishes the right to freedom of expression as a fundamental human right.

Freedom of the press, democracy, welfare, rights for minorities, an independent judiciary, a strong and active civil society and the fight against corruption are all important components in order to ultimately be able to ensure our common human rights. These were themes that I repeatedly raised during the two years I was rapporteur for democracy and human rights in the OSCE's Parliamentary Assembly.

We see many examples around the world right now of a worrying development regarding human rights. When journalists such as Anna Politkovskaja and Nils Horner are murdered in the line of duty, democracy and human rights are challenged. When war, devastation, and terror strike the innocent civilian population in Ukraine and the Middle East, democracy and human rights are challenged. When a foreign agents law that restricts civil society is to be introduced in Georgia and when hbtqi rights are questioned, democracy and human rights are challenged. And yes – when the jackboot, the hatred, and the threats are heard again in Europe, we here in the Riksdag and on the streets and squares must raise our voices for our democracy, human rights, and all people's equal value.

Mr. Speaker! To ensure universal human rights, a world community that respects international law is required. International law must apply in peace but also in the event of war. The brutal wars in Ukraine and Gaza, for which we receive horrific reports daily, bear witness to extensive violations of human rights, where innocent civilians are affected in the most barbaric ways. This evokes anger in me and in millions of people around the world.

When Karin Pettersson a while ago in Aftonbladet put words to the situation in Gaza, she did so, among other things, under a heading about the unbearable Swedish betrayal towards Gaza. She stated that the rules-based world order has shown itself to only apply to certain countries and that Sweden has contributed to that weight of silence which makes the illusion of a world order now clearly fracture in the eyes of many people.

Mr. Speaker! In January this year, I visited a country that, much like Ukraine, has been hit by Russian aggression. I visited Georgia, a country whose territory is today controlled by Russian interests to 20 percent. We were given the opportunity, together with the EU's crisis management effort, to visit the so-called administrative boundary line at South Ossetia on site.

The world's eyes are now turning towards Georgia again, but for different reasons. The so-called agent law that risks being introduced shortly is a copy of Russian legislation, and variants of it have also been introduced in countries such as Kyrgyzstan and Hungary. This is a development that we must follow and criticize, for it is ultimately a threat to many organizations' work for human rights.

Mr. Speaker! All around the world, we see political prisoners arbitrarily and unjustly imprisoned. For my part, I have been active regarding the release of Dawit Isaak. A few weeks ago, I wrote a question to the Minister for Foreign Affairs about Ahmadreza Djalali in Iran. A few years ago, I demonstrated outside the prison in Turkey where Selahattin Demirtas is imprisoned.

A few more political prisoners are mentioned in the report we are debating today.

The economist Gubad Ibadoghlu was attacked and arbitrarily imprisoned in Azerbaijan for political reasons.

On 4 November 2016, the aforementioned Selahattin Demirtas and Figen Yüksekdag, party leader of HDP, were imprisoned together with nine other Turkish members of parliament.

Osman Kavala, another Turkish human rights defender, was sentenced to life imprisonment by a Turkish court in April 2022.

It is important to emphasize that a free opposition is a prerequisite for a democratic and pluralistic society. It is of great importance that our Swedish government, in multilateral contexts and in bilateral contacts, addresses the vulnerable situation of opposition politicians and human rights defenders. These political prisoners must be released, and their human rights must be respected.

Mr. Speaker! The need for an internationally binding law to hold states accountable for gross environmental crimes is great. The purpose of the Rome Statute is to maintain peace and regulate the most serious international crimes. Large-scale environmental destruction definitely belongs among them. Sweden should therefore push within the UN and the EU to strengthen the legal framework so that it becomes a powerful tool to prevent ecocide by including ecocide in the Rome Statute. Those responsible for large-scale environmental destruction can then be held accountable for this at the International Criminal Court, ICC.

During the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has caused extensive destruction of nature and the environment, what we call ecocide crimes. This has occurred continuously but above all through the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam on June 6, 2023. The explosion of the Kakhovka Dam must be investigated, and those responsible must be held accountable.

As previously mentioned, the Social Democratic former Foreign Minister Margot Wallström visited the Committee on Foreign Affairs earlier this year and then accounted for a report that her group has submitted, regarding the environmental consequences of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. One of the recommendations that the working group submitted was precisely to internationally introduce ecocide as an environmental crime in the Rome Statute. This is something that we Social Democrats here today demand together with the Center Party, the Left Party, and the Green Party: that ecocide is added as a crime in the Rome Statute and that Russia, as a consequence of this, is prosecuted for ecocide crimes.

Mr. Speaker! In a couple of weeks, early voting for the EU election will open. Soon, a new European Parliament will take office. That election also actually concerns what we are discussing here today, human rights.

We see again how far-right and xenophobic parties that want to restrict democracy and human rights are increasing in certain countries and seeking more power. We see it in France, Germany and also here at home - Sweden Democrats who operate troll factories and are part of an internationally dangerous movement that builds its entire identity and voter base on division and hate. We have seen it before, and we see it again.

In such a climate, it is important to remember that it is ultimately our human rights and the idea of every person's unique individuality that are threatened - the valuation of all people's equal worth that I once chose to commit myself to.

This is what this debate is about, and this is what we must fight for. We cannot take human rights for granted. Human rights are the result of a long-term political struggle, and we must continue to stand up for that struggle both here at home on our own continent and around the world.

In conclusion, I would like to move for the approval of our reservations number 2, regarding political prisoners, and number 5, regarding ecocide.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for raising the issue of human rights so passionately. It is something that we are fundamentally quite in agreement on. Then there are other things where we can see different paths forward. It is about pressing on and supporting other countries.

I want to bring up this issue regarding ecocide. The member says that the Social Democrats and the opposition are driving this and want to see more active work, in addition to the formal aspect of including it in the statutes. More concretely, how would the member say that one moves forward? This is something that must be done in cooperation with others. Are there any concrete proposals? It would be interesting to hear.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, it is correct as Member Tolgfors points out that this is a proposal that four parties in the Swedish Riksdag are now putting forward. We urge the government to push forward to follow the recommendation from the working group that the former Foreign Minister Margot Wallström led, namely that we should add ecocide to the Rome Statute, so that it becomes possible at the International Criminal Court to prosecute countries that commit very serious environmental crimes. We have seen it in the case of the Kakhovka Dam, which Russia blew up, which has had extensive environmental consequences.

I personally feel great concern about what has been described in Göteborgs-Posten's report on Russian shadow fleets with ships that risk releasing oil. There are many more examples around the world of states using environmental destruction as a weapon against others. Unfortunately, we will surely see more examples of this in the future.

It is not my task to say here exactly how this shall proceed, but I think it is important that the Moderaterna and other parties included in the government base take our extended hand for a majority in the Riksdag and urge the government to review this, so that Sweden becomes proactive when it comes to developing and strengthening international law and ensuring that other states also follow international law.

Ecocide is such a crime that we, in accordance with the working group that Margot Wallström worked with, want to have added to the Rome Statute. Here, it would be very welcome if MP Tolgfors himself became proactive in his party and Foreign Minister Billström can then work for this. I believe that would be welcome, and it would be another example where we in Sweden can stand united in issues concerning Ukraine and Russia.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! As I said earlier, the Minister for Foreign Affairs has on two occasions in the EU Committee expressed himself positively precisely regarding the issue of ecocide. In previous consultations with the EU Committee, most recently in March, it has also been confirmed that the issue of ecocide is included as an element in the Council's discussion on Russia's aggression against Ukraine. In the reconstruction work, this is a natural part.

It is very welcome that the opposition supports the government's work moving forward in this. We do have a common goal. This is an important part where we must ensure that we support Ukraine. You are welcome to support the government's line in this. The line does not run contrary to what the member before [spoke] that the opposition wants. We also see that there is much that is necessary to address.

Last night I read the report that Margot Wallström has submitted to the government, with the 50 points. There is much there that is interesting. I look forward to a continued discussion on this.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! I am, of course, pleased that there is a positive attitude toward reviewing this. I also assume that the government reads Margot Wallström's report and works in accordance with the recommendations. That would be very welcome.

Of course, we would have been happy if you had also voted for our proposal that this work should be started already now and that one should not risk letting it wait. But I still perceive that the member is positively inclined towards this and that the government will continue to work on it in accordance with what has been reported in the EU Committee.

We continue to follow this. Thank you for the debate!

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Johan Büser, for an interesting contribution! There is a lot I can agree with.

The Speaker, however, mentioned something that particularly prompted me to request a reply here. It was what was said about boot-stomping and terrible historical events. This makes me think back to 2010, when the Riksdag, with the Social Democrats at the forefront, issued a notice to the then government to recognize the genocide of 1915. This was something that the then Social Democratic party leader Stefan Löfven moved forward with, and in the 2014 election campaign, he went out in Södertälje and promised that in the event of a Social Democratic election victory, the government would recognize this genocide.

We all know what happened next. The Social Democrats sat in power for eight years, without any recognition. Since then, the Social Democrats' then party leader, also Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven, has also backed down from this.

My question to the member is: Can one really trust the Socialdemokrater in these matters?

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Markus Wiechel, for the question! It is true that we had a party congress decision regarding what is mentioned here, about genocide. There were many committed Social Democrats who pushed for this.

Then a party congress decision does not always become the same as the government's policy. It is not always exactly implemented. We have different views on these issues.

We still have the party congress decision as far as I know, so the Social Democratic Party holds the same view as before. However, I have not sat in a government position myself. Stefan Löfven is also not here and cannot justify his decision. But it is clear that there is reason to pay attention to and continue to push that issue. That is what I can personally think.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the answer! It was surprisingly straightforward, I would say, which I of course welcome.

But the question is: Can one really trust the Social Democrats in these types of issues? It is quite often that the Social Democrats swing sharply from when they are in government to when they are in opposition and vice versa.

In this case, one sat in opposition and pushed for the recognition of a genocide, but one did not carry out this recognition when one ended up in government. And when one sat in government, one pursued a very lame Iran policy, if I may say so myself. As soon as one ends up in opposition, one should try to go to the forefront for a hard line against Iran. This does not inspire much confidence, I would say.

How do we know that what the Social Democrats say is actually what they will pursue in government? In the Social Democrats' track record, we clearly see that what is said often does not match.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! Whether one can trust the Social Democrats or not is not quite the theme of today's debate. We could also have a debate on whether one can trust the Sverigedemokraterna as a party. I sat and watched Kalla fakta on TV yesterday. There is a part there that raises questions. Can one trust the Sverigedemokraterna, and what kind of party culture exists there? But it is not this we are to discuss now.

I can state that the foreign policy pursued by the Social Democratic-led government, among other things, meant that we stood up for a one percent target in aid. We ensured that we had a large and strong support for human rights in the world, not only in our immediate vicinity but in many parts of the world. One can rely on the Social Democrats when it comes to standing up for Ukraine.

Representatives of the Sweden Democrats speak about the fact that there is now an upper limit for the support to Ukraine. Can one trust the Sweden Democrats when it comes to the support for Ukraine? Can one trust the Sweden Democrats when they have sister parties that have potential Russian connections? These are questions I ask myself from time to time. Can one trust the Sweden Democrats when it comes to issues concerning vulnerable minorities, hbtqi persons? What happened to the feminist foreign policy? What work is seen regarding equality around the world? Can one trust the Sweden Democrats there? Those are also questions I ask myself.

I believe that if you vote for the Social Democrats, you can trust that we will increase the aid again. We will stand up for human rights. We will stand up for women's rights. We will stand up for the rights of ethnic and religious minorities and hbtqi persons. We will stand up for democracy. We will not enter into any cooperation with any far-right parties - I can promise you that, Markus Wiechel.

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

Magnus Berntsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Today we have a motion report on human rights on the floor of the Riksdag, where, among other things, proposals on freedom of expression, minorities and ecocide are addressed.

Let me begin by commenting that at this time last year we also dealt with a report on human rights. It then contained a unanimous proposal for a declaration to create unity within the EU to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard, IRGC, as a terrorist organization.

Unfortunately, we still see that there is no such consensus in EU circles despite that the revolutionary guard oppresses the Iranian people, sponsors and supports Islamist terrorist groups in almost all of the Middle East and has also planned atrocities in our country and unjustly imprisoned Swedish citizens. If the EU's current high representative Josep Borrell does not manage to present a proposal for a terror listing, I hope that the next commissioner in that position after the EU election manages to do so.

We face a time of challenges and trials. Human rights are threatened, and democracy is fading away all around the world. In addition to the flagrant abuses from Russia against Ukraine and its people, we see a worrying trend regarding the development of human rights. According to Sida, the development is moving backward in more countries than it is moving forward in, and the majority of the world's population lives today under authoritarian regimes.

Mr. Speaker! Freedom of expression and freedom of opinion is an indispensable pillar for upholding and promoting democracy. Respecting freedom of expression is not just a matter of an individual right. It is also a prerequisite for people to be able to actively participate in political processes and engage in social issues. Without this freedom, the opportunities for people to express their opinions and influence the development of society are limited. Freedom of assembly and association, freedom of religion, and the right to education are all closely associated with freedom of expression and freedom of opinion.

Human rights defenders play a crucial role in maintaining a vibrant civil society and thereby a vibrant and functioning political democratic system. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to notice and support these individuals, whose work is hindered by many states around the world. By protecting human rights defenders, we not only strengthen their opportunities to act freely and safely, but we also strengthen democracy itself and respect for human rights.

Mr. Speaker! Large-scale environmental destruction has characterized history, and today's world is no exception. Ukraine is in the midst of a war and in a difficult reconstruction phase as a result of Russia's unlawful and unjustifiable invasion. The massive destruction that the war has caused leaves the country with significant challenges when it comes to restoring the environment.

Russia's actions, including the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam in the Kherson region, have been strongly condemned by the international community. This action represents a new level of destruction of critical civil infrastructure. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the cause of this action is thoroughly investigated and that those responsible are held accountable.

Ukraine faces a monumental task not only in terms of dealing with the environmental damage that the war has caused but also in terms of preparing for potential future damage. One of the most pressing issues concerns the enormous amount of mines and undetonated bombs that have been scattered across the country.

Foreign Minister Tobias Billström described the proposal to include the crime of ecocide in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as innovative in the EU Committee. I also hope that it can be one of the ways forward.

Mr. Speaker! Although freedom of religion is a fundamental right according to the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention, its importance has often been overlooked in Swedish foreign policy and Swedish development cooperation. The Christian Democrats have, however, constantly raised this perspective.

Over three-quarters of the world's population live in countries where freedom of religion is heavily restricted, either by the state itself or by other groups in society. These restrictions prevent people from living their lives in freedom and counteract the creation of equal, peaceful, and democratic societies. Furthermore, they often lead to increased poverty and vulnerability.

Particularly worrying is the increasing persecution of Christians around the world. Because of their faith, they risk their lives, deprivation of liberty, assault, and torture. It is 360 million Christians who are subjected to persecution. It is the most vulnerable religious group globally. This negative trend has been exacerbated by increasing deadly violence in countries such as Somalia, Nigeria, and some countries south of the Sahara, where violent extremism and weak state systems interact.

Even in the Middle East, religious minorities face serious threats and risk disappearing from their historical homelands. We have also in recent days received worrying information from Nagorno-Karabach about people being held captive there simply because they are Christian Armenians, as well as about churches and monasteries that are in the process of being obliterated.

It is important not to lose focus on other groups who also suffer for their faith. The situation for Uyghurs in China is such a situation that must not be forgotten. By drawing attention to and acting against such violations of religious freedom, Sweden can continue to be a leading voice for democracy and human rights internationally.

Mr. Speaker! With this, I move to approve the committee's proposal in the report.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! A year has passed since we last addressed the Committee on Foreign Affairs' report on human rights. It is a report that contains many important questions, which are also recurring.

I intended to begin with an important matter that, as far as I know, has never been raised in this chamber, namely the need to recognize the genocide of the so-called Ishaaq clan during the years 1987-1989. We all know that the situation on the Horn of Africa has long been deeply problematic. War and violence have succeeded one another, with all that entails. At the same time, we see how one of the absolute largest historical tragedies in the region still has not received sufficient recognition.

Mr. Speaker! We are, therefore, talking about a systematic and state-sponsored massacre of civilians, with rapes and other devastation. Somalia's then-dictator Siad Barre even let the Somali military create its own group, the name of which I shall try to pronounce: Dabar Goynta Isaaka. You will, of course, have to excuse the pronunciation. The name of the group can be translated as "ishaaq-exterminators", and it came to have the purpose of carrying out systematic attacks against unarmed civilian villages, water points, and grazing areas in what is today Somaliland - all of this with the intention of exterminating the ishaaq ethnic group.

The result of this indescribably cruel brutality, where over a quarter of a million innocent people were murdered, was that entire villages were depopulated, cities were looted, and several were almost totally destroyed. Somaliland's capital Hargeysa was destroyed by 90 percent. This genocide caused up to half a million people to flee from their homeland, and the mass exodus has later come to be described as one of the fastest and largest forced population movements that has been recorded in Africa.

Mr. Speaker! In 2001, the UN commissioned an investigation into previous violations of human rights in Somalia. Through this, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide were to be investigated. In the report, it is confirmed that the genocide against the Ishaaq had taken place. The UN investigator Chris Mburu could state that the genocide was intended and planned and that it was committed by the Somali government.

It is thus established that the dictatorship in Somalia has used its air force, its army, and its navy to poison wells, completely destroy cities and infrastructure, as well as to shell fleeing civilians. Furthermore, it is said to have used rape and starvation as weapons of war, imposed both a naval and an economic blockade, and done much more with the intention of terrorizing the civilian population in Somaliland to the maximum.

It should therefore be neither difficult nor controversial for the government, or for the opposition for that matter, to accept the Sweden Democrats' reservation number 3 and thereby recognize this genocide.

Mr. Speaker! If it was not clear, I would therefore move for approval of reservation 3.

I will now move on to the matters in this report that are subject to the so-called simplified motion handling, for which our positions here should be relatively well known.

Since we have already touched upon the theme of genocide, I must reasonably mention the genocide of 1915, which I raised in a previous exchange. Already on March 11, 2010, the government at that time received an announcement to recognize the aforementioned but simultaneously silenced genocide of Armenians, Assyrians/Syrians, Chaldeans, and Pontic Greeks. Sweden was also to act, according to the announcement, within the EU and the UN for an international recognition of this genocide.

Despite the fact that it has now been nearly 14 years since then, no government has followed the decision made by the Riksdag, and this regardless of the fact that the genocide almost took place in full view. The fact is that we Swedes even have our own heroine who witnessed this. I am, of course, speaking of Alma Johansson, who has her own place in the Room of Good Deeds here in the Riksdag. But we still see no recognition.

What other genocides do we have that we should acknowledge? Well, we naturally have the Islamic State's horrific atrocities in Syria and Iraq. I can guarantee that not a single person in here has missed the systematic terror and the killing that IS carried out in order to exterminate everyone who was not exactly like them in the territories they controlled. Most of us have also seen film clips showing the hideous scenes that unfolded when the barbarians boasted about their murders and their boundless cruelty.

Unlike the genocide in 1915, this occurred not particularly long ago, and many who managed to survive will live for a long time to come and be able to tell about their experiences. Furthermore, even in this case, there is support for classifying the events as genocide through decisions in other assemblies. In the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, a decision on such a resolution was made as early as January 2016, and similar declarations have come from both the UN and the European Parliament. But from Sweden, we see no recognition.

Mr. Speaker! We can do better than that. If we continue with a closely related phenomenon, we see the extensive systematic abuses in the Chinese Xinjiang province, also called East Turkestan. There are today extensive testimonies about concentration camps and a terrifying treatment of the Muslim group Uyghurs and other groups, such as Falun Gong followers, Christians and various minorities. A former member also mentioned Tibet, which is of course also relevant.

This oppression is ongoing today, and the least we can expect is a condemnation. What we should also expect, furthermore, is that these horrific abuses are investigated and that efforts are subsequently made to impose sanctions against those responsible for these abuses.

Mr. Speaker! Minorities tend, overall, to be hit hard, not least in authoritarian societies. And yes, the most persecuted group today is Christians. According to the organization Open Doors, it is estimated that 340 million Christians are affected by oppression and persecution solely because of their faith. Several thousand Christians are murdered annually for their faith, and churches and other important places are burned or vandalized.

How can Sweden, which so often has stepped forward internationally to support the vulnerable and which has often boasted about invested aid funds or various humanitarian efforts, not have placed more focus on this large group? It is a mystery to me.

Mr. Speaker! I see that time is running out. I would have liked to speak more, not least about the work to promote women's situation around the world. There are many examples that we in Sweden can and should do our utmost to improve the situation for those who lack the opportunity for education or to steer their own lives. We can and should do our utmost to counteract gender-based violence, female genital mutilation, forced marriage and honor oppression. All these topics are incredibly important, but there will surely be more opportunities to speak about them.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! My question to Markus Wiechel will be about what we spoke about earlier today. It concerns ecocide.

The party that the Sweden Democrats cooperate with, the Moderates, says no to pushing at this time for ecocide to be included in the Rome Statute. Even though Jimmie Åkesson has recently said that there is an upper limit to the support for Ukraine, I think it would be a very good thing if the Sweden Democrats could back up the Social Democrats, the Left Party, the Green Party, and the Center Party in that we should push for and urge the government to work so that ecocide is made into an international environmental crime.

I do not see that the Sweden Democrats have mentioned or commented on this, so I would like to ask the question to Member Markus Wiechel how he views the issue of ecocide.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the pressing question.

It is naturally an interesting topic that the member of Parliament brings up. The Sweden Democrats, as is known, have no own motions regarding exactly this. However, we follow it with interest. In the report, we also have a special statement where we describe it.

The matter is currently being prepared, and I think it is important to let the government investigate this. If necessary, we will gladly return and join forces with the Social Democrats and other parties who wish to pursue it.

The Chairman mentioned this regarding an upper limit. It becomes a bit strange in this debate. Now, this is not an aid debate or a debate concerning Sweden's military capability, but obviously, in connection with all the decisions we make here in Sweden's Riksdag, there are limits to what we can invest.

No one should doubt the Sweden Democrats' support for Ukraine. The Sweden Democrats were the first party in Sweden's Riksdag that wanted to send weapons and equipment to Ukraine, even before the invasion. We have gone to the forefront and pressured the government to be able to provide more support. The member naturally knows this.

No one should doubt the Sweden Democrats' strong support for Ukraine. I would like to assert that the Sweden Democrats are Ukraine's foremost friends in the Swedish Riksdag.

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

Johan Büser (S)

Mr. Speaker! This report and today's debate are about human rights. Many of us perceive that the Sweden Democrats have historically not been the foremost defenders of human rights. When it comes to religious minorities, sexual minorities, and many other vulnerable groups, the Sweden Democrats have not directly – nor do they today – made themselves particularly known for being defenders of these.

Many of us probably also turned on the TV yesterday and watched Kalla fakta, where it was reported on troll factories that resemble Russia's way of operating. Some of the parties around Europe that are close to the Sverigedemokraterna also have obvious Russian connections. We see in opinion polls how AfD is now Germany's second-largest party. We see how National Rally in France is moving forward very strongly. If there is anything that characterizes this type of party, it is that when they get power, and when they seek power, they attack and divide. They often worsen the human rights that I, in my speech, spoke about that I once in time engaged for. I am speaking about the idea of all people's equal value.

Does Markus Wiechel not feel a strong concern that parties such as Alternative für Deutschland and Nationell samling in France are now moving forward strongly and thereby risk threatening and undermining the human rights that we here in the chamber are speaking so passionately about today? I would like to have an answer to that.

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

Markus Wiechel (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I would first like to return to this issue of rapprochement with Russia. I actually have a Twitter thread, or a thread on what is now called X, where I clarify the Social Democrats' hypocrisy in this matter. They have repeatedly stood on Russia's side when we have stood firm. A clear example is that the Social Democrats chose to vote Russia back into the Council of Europe despite the country's aggression against Ukraine, while the Sweden Democrats were Ukraine's foremost friends. Therefore, the entire Ukrainian delegation came to our parliamentary group that evening.

Furthermore, a part was mentioned regarding the European Parliament. There are a number of different parties in the various party groups, and they do not think alike on all issues. Our view on the Russian question is very clear. We are extremely critical of Putin and his regime, which the member is aware of. In the European Parliament, we have, for example, submitted proposals to send more weapons to Ukraine. These were voted down by the Social Democrats and the Left Party, I can add. Our view on this issue is therefore very clear even in that assembly.

When it comes to other issues in the European Parliament, it is the case that the Sweden Democrats and the parties the member mentioned - AFD and so on - belong to two different groups. They belong to the ID group, while the Sweden Democrats belong to ECR. Of course, we can talk to each other, but it does not mean that we vote the same way.

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

Joar Forssell (L)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank you for a good debate so far.

This debate is a recurring debate in the Swedish Riksdag, and for liberals, it is always very uplifting. It was liberals who once upon a time invented human freedoms and rights. Liberals have been countered year after year by socialists, conservatives, and so on when it has come to the introduction of human freedoms and rights, but now we stand at a place in history where socialists and conservatives in Sweden stand behind the human freedoms and rights that liberals have fought for for hundreds of years.

Unfortunately, that is not the case in the whole world. A cold war is currently being waged against the liberal and democratic world order. This war is being waged primarily by the Communist Party in China together with the Islamist dictatorship in Iran and the fascist dictatorship in Putin's Russia. What they have in common is that they hate our way of life, our values, our liberal democracy, and the entire liberal and democratic world order, where human freedoms and rights are the very cornerstone. When these regimes commit genocide, oppress their peoples, and try to fight us democrats in everything they do, it is precisely the human freedoms and rights that they ultimately threaten.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, it is important with a values-based foreign policy. Next week I will travel to Taiwan's capital Taipei to be present when the new liberal president is inaugurated. This is an example of how one as a member of Parliament can conduct foreign policy and stand up for the democratic and liberal world order also in a time when the cold war against us is waged by the axis of evil powers China, Russia and Iran.

Mr. Speaker! That is also why it is important to have a values-driven foreign policy where we always highlight the rights and equality of LGBTQI persons, where we push the issue of ecocide, which is part of this report, and where we draw attention to and try to get political prisoners released. It is often the case that the political struggle for human freedoms and rights in countries where one does not have such things in the same way as we do in Sweden is primarily driven by civil society, political actors, and journalists. It is also often those who are hit hardest by the oppression.

I would like to vote in favor of the proposal in the report.

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! We are now debating a number of motions from the general motion period concerning human rights. In the UN Declaration of Human Rights and in the European Convention, it is established that all people have the same fundamental rights, including freedom of assembly, freedom of association, the right to strike, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and belief, as well as the right to participate in general, free and secret elections.

Unfortunately, we see that far too many countries violate these rights on a number of points, and the development does not seem to be heading in the right direction. We see it in the illegally occupied Western Sahara and in Palestine. In Gaza, the violations of human rights are very clear – Israel is preventing food and other supplies from reaching the civilian population, who are now in a hunger catastrophe. Thousands of dead civilians speak their clear language: Israel has violated international law and the laws of war.

We also see how countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, China, Russia, Belarus, Cambodia, to name a few, violate human rights on a large scale. In the unjust Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, we have seen countless crimes against the civilian population and human rights. In Afghanistan and Iran, we see how democracy and women's rights are violated every day, and in China, we see a continued oppression of ethnic minorities and dissenters.

It is particularly important that democratic countries such as Sweden do not let crimes against human rights go unnoticed but do their utmost to counteract these crimes and stand up for human rights fully.

Vänsterpartiet has written several motions concerning human rights in various areas. We stand up for human rights in all situations, and we are the first to protest when they are violated, regardless of who violates them or where it occurs. This report is quite narrow and only covers a few issues linked to human rights, but we have at other times raised and debated other issues with a focus on these rights. I will now focus on our two reservations in this report, and the first concerns political prisoners.

Turkey does not live up to the requirements for democracy and human rights. Rather, the development is going in the completely wrong direction. In the 2023 election, it was evident that the opposition's opportunities for a fair election campaign were severely limited. Several leading figures, organizers, lawyers, journalists, and cultural actors were arrested before the election, which, according to election observers from OSCE, led to an uneven playing field in the election campaign.

The country's third-largest party, the pro-Kurdish opposition party HDP, risks being dissolved by Erdogan's regime, and leading politicians could be sentenced in mass trials, completely in violation of democratic principles. In order to have any chance of participating in the election, politicians were instead forced to run for a significantly smaller party: the red-green left, YSP.

But the oppression against the opposition began long before that. During the 2016 coup attempt, thousands of dissidents, journalists, teachers, lawyers, and human rights activists were imprisoned. Turkey has left the Istanbul Convention, which protects women's rights not to be subjected to violence, and since then, equality has significantly deteriorated.

On 4 November 2016, Selahattin Demirtas and Figen Yüksekdag, party leader of HDP, were imprisoned together with nine other members of parliament on political grounds. Demirtas is still imprisoned. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly stated that the purpose of the imprisonment has been to stifle political opposition and debate in Turkey. The Court has further urged Turkey to immediately release Demirtas. His only crime is that he has openly criticized Erdogan's policy, and because of that, he has now spent eight years in a Turkish prison under very difficult conditions. Sweden should work for an unconditional and immediate release of Selahattin Demirtas.

It is also reprehensible that Sweden has resumed arms trade with Turkey as a concession for NATO membership. Turkey must also not be allowed to become an EU candidate as long as basic democratic freedoms and rights are not respected. Now that we are members of the same military alliance, it is important that Sweden does not reduce the criticism of Turkey when Turkey continues to commit abuses against the opposition and violates basic democratic freedoms and rights.

Mr. Speaker! Our second reservation concerns a completely different area, namely serious international environmental crimes, which are commonly called ecocide. We have submitted this reservation together with the Social Democrats, the Green Party, and the Centre Party.

It is obvious that nature needs stronger legal protection and that the needs have increased over the years. The cases of large-scale interventions in the environment that have damaged ecosystems and habitats for an indefinite period are unfortunately many. Mining companies, loggers, fossil energy companies and other developers get away easily. What remains is a destroyed environment and extensive costs that must be borne by the entire society.

An ecocide legislation would be an important tool in stopping this and demanding accountability from those who deplete the environment. An international law on ecocide would be of particularly great significance for the poor countries with weak environmental legislation that are hit hardest by the extensive environmental crimes.

For some years now, the ICC has begun to address environmental goals. It is an important step forward and means that certain environmental cases can be taken up in court within the framework of crimes against humanity. It is good, but it would be even better with a pure ecocide application where all cases of extensive environmental destruction would be prosecutable. It would send an important signal that the destruction of nature in itself is a crime.

During the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has caused extensive destruction of nature and the environment, i.e., ecocide crimes. This has occurred continuously but primarily through the destruction of the Nova Kachovka dam on June 6, 2023. As a consequence of Russia's actions, it will take a long time before nature and the environment recover, if they ever do. The committee also received a clear account of the extensive environmental crimes in Ukraine through the investigation led by Margot Wallström.

Vänsterpartiet considers that ecocide must be added as a crime in the Rome Statute and that Russia, along with several environmental villains, must be prosecuted for crimes against nature. Sweden should, within the UN and the EU, work to update the legal framework so that it becomes a powerful tool to prevent crimes against nature by including ecocide in the Rome Statute.

The committee's majority is fundamentally positive towards the proposal but considers that it needs to be further investigated. I truly regret that the committee's majority cannot stand behind the proposal at this stage and thereby accelerate the process in this extremely important issue.

I move for approval of reservations 2 and 5.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Johnsson Fornarve for the speech.

Today's report concerns human rights. We could say a lot about it, but I have a specific question.

The Speaker mentioned the devastation that Russia's cruel war of invasion inflicts on Ukraine. Yesterday, the fourth person on the Left Party's EU list said that one way forward is to negotiate with Russia about Ukraine. This makes me very worried, because we are talking about a country that commits war crimes, which invades and occupies another country and which is a totalitarian state with a dictator. I think it wavers here when it comes to the Left Party's view on democracy.

Can the member comment on where Vänsterpartiet stands regarding how Ukraine should become a free country again?

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

Vänsterpartiet stands fully in support of the people of Ukraine every day of the week. We have not changed our position on this point and believe that Sweden must support the Ukrainian people in all conceivable ways, both militarily and humanitarily, so that Ukraine can regain control over its own country and create peace. That is my short answer and our view.

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

Katarina Tolgfors (M)

Mr. Speaker! I wish I felt completely convinced. Can the member answer yes or no as to whether it is a viable path to peace in Ukraine to negotiate with Russia?

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

Lotta Johnsson Fornarve (V)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Katarina Tolgfors for the question.

No, at the current moment, there is no possibility to negotiate peace. Now it is entirely about continuing to assist Ukraine in all conceivable ways, militarily and humanitarily, so that Ukraine can regain control over its own country and create peace. I see no other possibility, and we stand behind continued massive support from the Swedish and European side.

However, more can be done when it comes to exerting pressure on Russia in different ways. It may be a different discussion, but here I believe there is more to be done.

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

Kerstin Lundgren (C)

Mr. Speaker! Human rights have no hierarchies. They are universal and mutually reinforcing. Today, we unfortunately see how human rights are oppressed and trampled upon in more and more countries. We see it when justice systems are torn down. We see it when civil society is stifled in different ways, when it becomes GONGO instead of CSO and when political opposition is silenced in different ways, imprisoned or even murdered.

V-Dem, our fantastic institute in Gothenburg, describes the third wave of autocratization that is now clearly underway by starting with a focus on the media – that the press is attacked and silenced. Then it continues with academia and with various minorities and so on. One can see the pattern. It is global. We can see it in Sweden as well.

We celebrated Freedom of the Press Day on May 3. As previously mentioned, Sweden is an exception. Only 0.8 percent of the world's population live in countries with press freedom where fake news can be scrutinized, where it is not easy to push through a message using troll factories without being scrutinized.

We must, of course, be mindful of this. There are parts in this report, Mr. Speaker, which is primarily a motion report. Some of the issues addressed here are also in upcoming reports, for example, the one on international affairs which we will deal with later.

I believe there are reasons to raise the joint reservation on political prisoners. There are more political prisoners than those we are highlighting here. I am thinking of prisoners such as Kara-Murza in Russia, for example, or Yalçin, or others who are clear political prisoners. We have in the upcoming report the question of Gui Minhai, whose sixtieth birthday occurred just recently, on May 5, when he was still in prison. We also have Dawit Isaak, who has been imprisoned for so long.

We lift here three examples of political prisoners who should be examples in this context: Ibadoglu in Azerbaijan and Demirtas and Kavala in Turkey. We demand that everything be done from the Swedish side to draw attention to and push forward to build a stronger opinion for release.

If media and academia are in focus when autocrats try to stifle democracy, as I have touched upon, it is clear that women's rights and hbtqi people's rights are also being attacked. They try to stifle the space for women's opportunities and once again subordinate women in different ways, and often begin with the rhetoric towards hbtqi people.

Here I believe there are grounds to be clear from the Swedish side, not just in a foreign policy declaration but in the very mandate given to our foreign authorities who are to be a voice on the ground, to provide support, to provide space and to create security for the vulnerable. I therefore wish to move for approval of reservation 4 under point 3.

We have two rather broad reservations in this report. One concerns precisely the political prisoners. The other concerns large-scale environmental destruction, so-called ecocide.

The purpose of the Rome Statute is to maintain peace and regulate the gravest international crimes. It is important that we use this framework and try to strengthen it so that we make environmental destruction what it is, namely a basis for war and conflict. We have been able to see this clearly, as several here have witnessed, in Ukraine. It has provided clear examples of what can follow and what the long-term effects of this type of environmental crime will be. The Kakhovka Dam is a clear example. Should another nuclear power plant like the one in Zaporizhzhia be hit and cannot be secured, the catastrophe would be enormous.

The question of ecocide is therefore important to raise. In the report, the majority welcomes in its proposal various processes ongoing in the field regarding responsibility and accountability for large-scale environmental destruction. From the government's side, they want to strengthen the EU's environmental crime directive. They describe the establishment of the crime of ecocide as an innovative proposal, but it does not sound like it is the government's proposal, but rather sounds like it is someone else's proposal that was innovative. But it is part of an important debate.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs has underlined that the work to develop the international law framework in this area presupposes that there is a broad consensus. I see, however, no example of the government pushing to achieve that consensus.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs has, in consultation with the EU Committee, confirmed that the issue of ecocide is included as an element in the Council's discussions. This is what the majority of the committee writes. But, Mr. Speaker, it is not any signal that Sweden is pushing for this or that this is Sweden's position, but that it is included in the Council's discussions.

The committee makes a summary and notes that it is an innovative proposal that could constitute a possible way forward, but not that it is a way forward that one wants to stand behind. The proposal requires an extensive legal analysis and impact assessment and is a difficult-to-negotiate compromise in the Rome Statute.

The reasoning that the majority of the committee supports in the report does not provide for Sweden to push forward to succeed in gathering a majority and creating the conditions to make ecocide a crime under the Rome Statute. It is regrettable. It is weak.

I note that the Sweden Democrats are following the work with interest. It is indeed these discussions that one should follow with interest.

We will continue to push forward.

Mr. Speaker! I also move for the approval of this reservation.

(Applause)

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

Jacob Risberg (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Eleven short and simple words summarize what this debate is fundamentally about, eleven words that were formulated over 75 years ago and which are among the best and most beautiful ever formulated. It concerns Article 3 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Hold on now, because this is explosive: "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." Let that sink in. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

The first two articles in the Universal Declaration provide the background and explain that these rights apply to all people, regardless of age, regardless of which political system one lives under, regardless of whether one lives in conflict or peace, regardless of whether one lives under occupation or has self-determination, and regardless of gender, religion, background, sexual orientation, and so on.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and personal security. The following 27 articles in the universal declaration elaborate on what life, liberty and personal security mean in practice. It is these issues that we are here to debate today.

Mr. Speaker! In Sweden, we have lived in peace for over 200 years, and during the 20th century, we have had an ever-strengthening democratic development with increased rights for each individual. Sometimes we make small adjustments that restrict one of the rights in order to strengthen one of the other rights, but fundamentally, we in the Riksdag agree that human rights are important and shall apply to everyone. This is something we take for granted.

But human rights are not something we can take for granted just because we have a stable democracy. In country after country that we consider to be democracies, we see how various restrictions on human rights are occurring today.

In the USA, the right to abortion has been heavily restricted in a number of states in recent years. In countries such as Hungary and Poland, rights have moved backward over a number of years, even if we now, after the election in Poland, see that it is possible to achieve a change. The current Polish government has reversed a number of the recent years' restrictive legislation. It is therefore possible to fight for increased rights.

Mr. Speaker! In the country often called the Middle East's only democracy, Israel, we saw before October 7 how the government was about to introduce a series of laws to change the judiciary, which in turn could limit some of the human rights for Israeli citizens.

After that, we have seen how the current conflict and the war in Gaza have destroyed the life opportunities for the people of Gaza and also to a large extent on the West Bank. We have seen how hospitals have been bombed to pieces, traces of torture and mass graves. We have seen how schools, churches and mosques have been bombed to pieces. Today we see famine.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and personal security. This must, of course, also apply to the children in Gaza and in the West Bank.

In that war and in many other places around the world, we see how countries, governments, parties, and politicians make distinctions regarding which people the human rights should apply to. We see these undertones even here in Sweden, where parties such as the Sweden Democrats, for example, want to limit the rights for certain people depending on background. This can have consequences even within the EU, where there is a risk that far-right parties will move forward in the upcoming European Parliament election. What will this mean for human rights, even regarding European citizens?

The UN's Universal Declaration is very clear: The rights are universal, meaning they apply to everyone, regardless of where one lives, background, and so on. It is also very clear that we all, including the Swedish government, have a responsibility to ensure that human rights are upheld everywhere in the world.

Principles such as responsibility to protect, the obligation to protect, go very far regarding the requirement for Sweden as part of the international community to protect the civilian population in an area if it is subjected to war crimes or genocide.

Principles such as do no harm clarify how to act when it comes to aid, both so that the aid does as much good as possible and so that the aid, or the conditions for the aid, do not lead to anyone risking being harmed.

In the UN General Assembly, votes are constantly held on various declarations to protect certain groups around the world, and in that regard, Sweden is also obliged to ensure that the results are complied with.

Mr. Speaker! Recently, we in the Riksdag have focused much on the wars in Ukraine and Gaza as well as the constantly deteriorating and very worrying developments in Iran, but I would like to take the opportunity to bring up two other areas where the humanitarian situation is very worrying, where human rights are far from being respected, and where we also, as part of the international community, have a great responsibility.

In Yemen, over 2 million children under five are malnourished - 2 million children - and 90,000 children are estimated to have died as a result of the nine-year war, a war where it has emerged that Saudi Arabia has used Swedish war materiel. In this situation, we see how the government is cutting back on aid and focusing on strengthening Swedish companies, stopping irregular migration, and setting a cap on how much Sida may spend on democratization and peace efforts in Yemen specifically.

The brutal war in Sudan, which flared up again a little over a year ago, has resulted in the world's largest child refugee crisis. Over 4 million children are fleeing the violence. Millions of children are dehydrated and suffering from severe malnutrition, and the annual period of famine has not even begun. 25 million people, of whom 14 million are children, are in need of humanitarian aid. And in addition to the acute risk of malnutrition and famine, diseases such as cholera, measles, and malaria are now raging—diseases for which we actually have cures.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and personal security. This applies, of course, also to the children in Yemen and Sudan.

Mr. Speaker! In addition to the immediate right to life, I would like to raise a couple of other aspects of human rights.

Democratic processes are being undermined globally, and polarization is increasing. Journalists, politicians, and people who defend the environment and human rights are harassed, persecuted, and murdered. This is a dangerous development that we need to do everything to break. Freedom of speech and journalism are crucial for democracy to develop. We must be able to strengthen the protection and support for civil society also where it is most difficult and involves the greatest challenges.

Miljöpartiet believes that Sweden should become sharper when it comes to working through regional organizations and our bilateral and multilateral connections to ensure that the international community has as a goal to achieve and maintain the highest democratic standards. Sweden shall, through its foreign policy, focus on the fundamental pillars of democracy and, among other things, support electoral integrity, which is the foundation of democracy.

The dissemination of disinformation on various internet platforms is carried out by states, private individuals, and organizations, as well as by parties to make money. Especially in crisis situations, people's fear and anxiety are exploited. In countries that restrict freedom of speech but which are still open to the outside world, independent social media play an important role for the democracy movement.

Mr. Speaker! Miljöpartiet considers that the EU needs to set the framework for both when content in social media violates human rights and for when censorship or restriction of content does so. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to move for the approval of Miljöpartiets reservation 1.

Mr. Speaker! Much has been said in this chamber about Russia's fearsome full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and the support for Ukraine is strong even though some party representatives have recently questioned just this.

In order to be able to live up to the most basic parts of human rights, it is required that there is an environment and nature that is viable and that can be used to produce food and for recovery and outdoor activities.

When Nova Kachovka, one of Europe's largest dams located in southern Ukraine, was sabotaged in June last year, industrial complexes and communities were flooded by enormous amounts of water. A toxic mixture of chemicals and oil washed over the landscape, crops were destroyed, and half a million hectares of farmland are currently unusable.

Ukraine is one of the world's largest exporters of wheat and one of the most important exporting countries for a number of economically weak countries. Russia's attack affects the entire world's food security. Ukraine's nature is called Europe's green heart, with an enormous diversity of animals and vegetation that is now being bombed, mined, and totally destroyed. Russia has also mined and threatened to destroy the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. If the threat is carried out, even more fatal environmental consequences await.

In both Ukrainian and Russian legislation, some of these crimes are classified as ecocide, but under international law, Russia currently enjoys virtual impunity for the acts of war committed against Ukraine's nature. Stopping this impunity by criminalizing ecocide has been discussed internationally for more than half a century, but now the issue has gained new momentum.

Ecocide was discussed at the International Criminal Court's, ICC's, annual meeting in The Hague last year. It is not reasonable that international law gives states free rein to make life-sustaining systems for billions of people unusable.

The purpose of the Rome Statute is to maintain peace and regulate the gravest international crimes. We believe that large-scale environmental destruction belongs among them. The International Criminal Court should therefore be given an expanded role, and ecocide crimes must be introduced into the Rome Statute.

Mr. Speaker! Everyone has a right to life, liberty, and personal security.

(Applause)

In this speech, Emma Berginger and Jan Riise (both MP) concurred.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 15 May.)

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