Security and accessibility in elections

Per-Arne Håkansson (S)

Madam Speaker! A well-functioning democracy requires that elections can be conducted in a secure and safe manner. It is a requirement that we as voters can make, and it is an important task for responsible authorities to do everything in their power to ensure this.

At the same time, we should all be aware that an election, in purely practical and operational terms, is built on an interaction and cooperation between authorities at the national, county, and municipal levels, and elected representatives and volunteer forces who are present at the polling stations.

It is in the polling station, regardless of whether it concerns early voting or whether the vote is cast on election day, that the election is decided. For many involved who serve or who come there as voters, it may be about well-practiced routines, while for others it may be the first time they participate in an election. Information in advance, clarity, and simplicity in the procedure itself are, for this reason, important prerequisites to consider.

The Committee on the Constitution's report, KU4, which is presented in the chamber today for a decision, is titled Security and Accessibility in Elections. Fundamentally, there is an electoral law that is always applicable and which has formed the basis for the elections previously held. The changes now proposed aim to protect public elections and to strengthen the voter's opportunity to exercise their right to vote.

I would like to vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report and reject the motions that have been submitted.

Madam Speaker! At the proposal of the Committee on the Constitution, the Riksdag decided in December 2021 on a notice that provisions should be introduced requiring a poll clerk to be present when a voter receives assistance during voting or when taking their ballot papers behind the screen. The Committee considered, however, that an evaluation during the 2022 elections should first be carried out. In the bill we have dealt with, some tightenings in the electoral act are proposed, which take their starting point precisely in this evaluation.

It means that the Election Authority is given an explicit responsibility to support and coordinate the work with the protection of elections. It also means that the county administrative boards, the municipalities and the foreign authorities that have established polling stations shall promptly report incidents that can affect the conduct of elections to the Election Authority.

It is emphasized that the requirements for the voting to be accessible to all voters are clarified, that more voters, including persons placed in special youth homes, shall be given the opportunity to vote with mobile polling stations, and that Swedish citizens living abroad who have fallen off the electoral roll shall be able to vote early in Sweden and thereby be re-included in the electoral roll.

The proposal also contains an assessment from the government that a possibility should be introduced to send digital voting cards to voters who have chosen to receive messages from authorities in a secure digital mailbox.

Madam Speaker! In the considerations, there are questions regarding the duty of confidentiality for election assistants and requirements for ID checks during voting. In a motion from Sverigedemokraterna, an announcement is advocated regarding requirements for ID checks. Based on that, we can refer to the fact that the electoral law already states that voters who are not known to the poll workers shall provide identification or otherwise verify their identity. In the preparatory works for the provisions, it is stated that identity shall be verified through identification or in some other reliable way, in practice by someone else certifying the fact.

The committee does not see that there are sufficient grounds to take the initiative to change the provisions of the electoral act so that there is an absolute requirement for valid identification. Such a requirement would risk leading to eligible voters being practically excluded from participating in the election. For that reason, the committee has reached the conclusion that, if identification is missing, there shall be an opportunity to verify identity in other ways, for example by having another person certify it.

In another committee motion from the Sverigedemokraterna, it is proposed that a criminally sanctioned duty of confidentiality shall be introduced for voter assistants and that poll workers on site shall be required to inform all voter assistants about the duty of confidentiality. This was also an issue that was included when the 2020 electoral review was initiated. It was tasked to consider and submit proposals for measures that can contribute to ensuring that persons with, for example, visual impairments can vote personally without being forced to reveal the secrecy of the vote to anyone. In a partial report, the review proposed that there should be a provision that would require the poll worker to specifically inform every private individual who helps a voter to vote that a criminally sanctioned duty of confidentiality would apply to him or her.

In the proposition, the government stated that the proposal, with certain adjustments, had been submitted on two previous occasions and was not implemented then, and that the reasons previously put forward against the introduction of a criminally sanctioned duty of confidentiality for individuals acting as assistants in connection with voting applied with the same force as when the issue was last considered, that is, it could be assumed that many would lack insight into the criminal consequences of disclosing or utilizing information about how someone has voted. In other words, it can be said that the sanction procedure would then become more like a shot in the air.

The Committee on the Constitution rejects the motions with reference to the considerations that have been made. That being said, there is once again reason to return to the importance of information in advance. Respect, dignity and trust are of importance to consider in all contexts, not least in situations concerning the voting moments.

Madam Speaker! Finally, I would like to say a few words about the opportunities for Swedes living abroad in the election. In this context, it can be mentioned that Sweden, compared to several of our neighboring countries, has a fairly extensive and far-reaching right for Swedes living abroad to participate in elections. In Denmark, to take a nearby example as someone living in northwestern Skåne, one must first be resident in the country to be eligible to vote in the election to the Folketing. This can result in Danish citizens living in, for example, Helsingborg or Landskrona not having the right to vote in Denmark and also not in the Swedish parliamentary election. In Norway, as I understand it, there are requirements that one must actively register in the electoral roll to be able to participate if one has lived abroad for more than ten years.

When it concerns Swedes living abroad who have fallen out of the electoral roll and wish to vote in an election, a problem has been noted regarding the provisions in the Electoral Act concerning the conditions for being reinstated in the electoral roll. If the Swede living abroad is located abroad, he or she can be reinstated in the electoral roll by casting an early vote abroad. No corresponding possibility exists for early voting in Sweden. Swedes living abroad who have fallen out of the electoral roll and who are located in Sweden during the voting period must, therefore, under today's rules, travel outside the country's borders and vote from there to be included in the electoral roll for the election in question.

Now there are proposals from the government to remedy this by having the cast early vote be considered a notification to be reinstated in the electoral roll. The central Election Authority shall then add the voter to the electoral roll.

Madam Speaker! From the Social Democrats' side, we have no comments or specific statements regarding the report being presented. Our ambition is that there should continue to be a broad parliamentary consensus on how we organize our elections. There is also work ongoing within what is called the Ballot Committee, which was appointed some time ago – some here in the chamber are part of this – where they are to evaluate today's ballot system. This evaluation is to be submitted by January 2026 at the latest.

These are questions where I mean that there is reason to emphasize the importance of broad support for long-term perspective, accessibility, security, and safety in the upcoming elections.

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

Fredrik Lindahl (SD)

Madam Speaker! First, I would like to move for the approval of reservation 2 in this report KU4. We have an additional reservation, but in accordance with tradition, I only move for one of them even though we obviously stand behind both.

Today's matter, Security and accessibility at elections, is the result of the reports submitted by the 2020 election review as well as an announcement from the Committee on the Constitution regarding the presence of the polling clerk when a voter receives assistance from a voting assistant.

The Sweden Democrats welcome the government's bill in large part, and we stand behind the proposals that have been put forward in the report. Two things are missing, however, and I will return to them later in my speech.

Establishing a central incident reporting will facilitate for the Election Authority, partly to coordinate the work surrounding the protection of the election process, and partly to gain an overall view of how the election is proceeding as the county administrative boards and the municipal election committees report incidents. Obtaining this overview means that even before the election itself is concluded, one can address vulnerabilities and deficiencies that are highlighted, which means that one reduces the risk of the election being appealed and needing to be repeated. The compilation of received incidents is also a support for the Election Authority and other actors working with these types of issues when it comes to identifying needs for direct practical measures in the election process as well as for future reforms in the area.

Another piece of news is that there shall now be a requirement that a poll worker must always be present when voters enlist an assistant. This is a welcome proposal to address so-called group, family, and clan voting. Voters who need to take help from others to be able to vote are a particularly vulnerable group. To then have to enter the voting booth with two or three other people, or in the worst case even more, hanging over one's shoulder, creates a situation where the individual voter can be improperly influenced regarding how she or he should vote. That an independent poll worker shall always be present will ensure the voter's right to be able to decide which party she or he shall vote for without influence from anyone else.

We Sweden Democrats, however, think it is unfortunate that the government has chosen not to proceed with the proposal to introduce a duty of confidentiality even for voter assistants, which was a proposal from the 2020 election review. If a poll worker has helped a voter to vote, they are covered by a duty of confidentiality, which is completely normal and natural. We believe it is equally normal and natural that voter assistants are also covered by the same type of duty of confidentiality. Those who need to take help from others to vote belong to society's most vulnerable groups in this regard. That it is not possible to ensure the protection that other voter groups have, that is, the secrecy of the vote, to such a great extent, we consider to be an obvious deficiency.

It is difficult to grasp the enormous violation that occurs when a family member, friend, or staff member who takes care of you in everyday life and who helped you make your voice heard at another occasion, perhaps at the coffee table at work, at the family dinner, or at the pub, reveals what exactly you have voted for. It is completely unreasonable behavior, and it is utterly inconceivable that such conduct is not illegal today. It is obvious that the duty of confidentiality must also apply to voting assistants, and it is unfortunate that it will take some more time before we get that in place.

The Sweden Democrats' second proposal, concerning reservation 2, is to introduce a requirement to provide identification when voting. Today, it is possible to vote without providing identification, for example, by another person certifying the voter's identity or by the vote receiver recognizing you. This loophole in the legislation seems a bit strange because the routine throughout the country is usually that the vote receiver requires you to provide identification in connection with you handing over your vote. It is rather an exception that the vote is handed over solely on personal acquaintance or by someone else certifying your identity.

In view of social development, it is self-evident to us that one needs to introduce absolute ID requirements for voting. Our view is that this is not at all something that is controversial to introduce because in practically all other contexts, for example when you meet authorities, pick up packages, or look too young at Systembolaget, you need to provide some form of identification. Not having to do this when you exercise your right to vote is rather the more controversial thing in this context. On the one hand, it is a completely arbitrary assessment by the individual vote recipient, and on the other hand, the decision to accept the vote can have serious consequences if it is wrong.

At every election, one is forced to read news articles where individual voters are said to have been incorrectly crossed off the electoral roll and have thus been deprived of their right to vote. There may be several reasons why this has happened, but one reason can actually be just this exception in the otherwise so common routine. When a poll clerk believes they recognize someone or another person certifies who the voter is, the wrong person can completely suddenly be crossed off in the electoral roll, with devastating consequences for the individual. It is impossible to rectify afterwards.

In conclusion, I have a comment regarding the ballot system. In view of the experiences that, among others, the Election Authority has reported during previous elections, the Sverigedemokraterna have agreed with the government in the Tidö Agreement that the ballot system with party-specific ballots shall be reviewed. As a result of this agreement, the government has appointed a parliamentary committee to review the ballot system. The investigation has been expanded through a supplementary directive and has been granted an extension of time. The assignment shall be reported by August 14, 2026, at the latest. A partial report concerning the assignment to evaluate today's ballot system shall, however, be submitted as early as January 15, 2026.

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

Susanne Nordström (M)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the proposals in report KU4, Security and accessibility during elections.

Our free elections are self-evident foundations in our democracy. But democracy is never self-evident. It must constantly be protected and strengthened. The Government therefore proposes a number of measures that ensure the integrity, accessibility, and security of elections.

The Swedish Election Authority shall be given a clearer responsibility to coordinate the work on election security and to analyze risks. What risks are there then? In recent years, we have seen how false information can spread quickly, for example on social media and other platforms, sometimes with the aim of undermining our entire electoral system. This causes democracy to be shaken in one way or another. There have been rumors that votes have not been counted. We know that election workers have been subjected to threats and aggressive behavior. In some cases, persons have stood behind the voting screen together, i.e., a violation of the principle of secret voting. All assistance behind the voting screen shall always take place in the presence of a poll clerk.

It is appropriate that a common routine for incident reporting is introduced. Both election authorities and the public should be able to quickly report irregularities. This gives us a correct national picture and the opportunity to act in time.

For increased openness, accreditation of election observers, both national and international, is introduced. They shall be able to be present before, after, and during elections, without being hindered. Transparency creates trust both in Sweden and abroad.

Accessibility is also central. Election authorities and municipalities shall ensure that premises, voting procedures, and information work for all voters, not only physically but also practically. The municipalities shall report on the accessibility of the premises no later than 32 days before election day so that everyone who needs to can plan their voting in good time.

Madam Speaker! Another thing is that the system of mobile polling stations shall be expanded to reach more groups. Even persons who are in police custody or in healthcare facilities shall now be given the opportunity to vote. Even Swedish citizens living abroad will be given better opportunities to vote.

Those who have fallen out of the electoral roll should be able to re-enter – we have heard that before.

If digital ballots are introduced, it will go faster. It will become more secure, and fewer voters will receive their ballots far too late.

Appealing the election result shall become clearer. The person who wishes to appeal must state their identity so that it can be determined whether the person has the right to appeal. One might think it is a simple measure, but it is important for the rule of law.

Madam Speaker! The measures I have presented here are based on lessons from the recent elections. We have seen incidents such as threats against election workers, obstacles for the elderly and persons with disabilities, and situations where voters are subjected to undue influence. Such things must never occur in a democracy like ours.

In summary, this is about four things: security, transparency, accessibility, and legal certainty through better coordination, clear procedures for incident reporting, accreditation of election observers, increased accessibility, and modernized digital tools. Thus, we take the next step to secure every citizen's right to vote freely.

Democracy is nothing we can take for granted. It must be protected every day and at every election.

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

Muharrem Demirok (C)

Madam Speaker! When we talk about security and accessibility at elections, it is about the very heart of our democracy. Every person must be able to vote freely, safely, and securely, and we must all be able to trust that the election is conducted correctly. I do not believe this is a self-evident matter only for the Center Party, but for all of us sitting in here.

Our elections must not only be free and secret, but they must also be accessible to everyone and protected against threats, influence, and interference.

Madam Speaker! We often speak of living in a time when democracy can no longer be taken for granted. Disinformation, cyber threats, and attempts at influence have become part of our everyday lives, even here at home in Sweden.

It is important to safeguard security during elections. But we know that not everyone yet has an equal ease in exercising their right to vote. Therefore, these proposals which strengthen both security and accessibility are so important and so welcome.

Centerpartiet stands behind the proposals that are now being presented, but I want to particularly highlight four parts as important.

Firstly: Valmyndigheten is given a clear responsibility to coordinate the work regarding the security of the elections. Someone is needed to hold the whole together, especially when we see that cyber threats are increasing.

Secondly: A clearer system for incident reporting is introduced. When something happens during an election campaign, it must be able to be reported and addressed quickly. We have seen when it has fallen short. Therefore, it is important to remain vigilant at all times and take action. It strengthens the security and the trust in the electoral system.

For the third point: Clearer requirements for accessibility are set. If you can vote, it should not depend on whether you see, hear, or walk well enough or live in the right place. The right to vote applies to everyone. Then the system must also work for everyone.

For the fourth: More opportunities for mobile polling stations are introduced. This means a lot for those who cannot get to a polling station, for example, residents in elderly care homes and youth homes. It makes the right to vote real, not just theoretical.

Madam Speaker! I come from Östergötland. There, city and countryside meet. Democracy is present every day. It is often the municipalities that take the great practical responsibility for ensuring that the entire election functions. They do a fantastic job, but many small municipalities struggle with scarce resources. Therefore, the Center Party also wants to emphasize that we must ensure, from a national level, that the support truly reaches all the way out. It doesn't matter how good laws we enact in this chamber if the municipalities do not have the opportunity to follow them.

We must never forget the difference between city and country. In large cities, it is often about information and accessibility. In the countryside, it is almost exclusively about distance. No one should have to travel several miles to vote.

Madam Speaker! Democracy is something that is built all the time, not just during an election year. Trust is not created by systems and rules but by people who feel involved. We all want more young people to open their eyes to how the election works, for schools to invite them to follow the vote count, or for more young people to get the chance to be poll workers. It is only through participation, knowledge, and proximity that we build the democracy of the future.

Our elections are the high point of democracy. It is the day when all power truly belongs to the people. But for people to feel that security, they must trust that the system works and feel included.

I often think about how it looks in practice in the school's gymnasium in Boxholm, in the culture house in Motala, or in the parish hall in Valdemarsvik when people meet election officials whom they recognize and who ensure that everything goes correctly. It is there and then that trust is built. It is then that democracy is built from the bottom up.

I therefore want, Madam Speaker, once again on behalf of the Centre Party to move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision. We stand behind the measures that strengthen security, increase accessibility, and safeguard trust in our democratic processes.

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

Gudrun Brunegård (KD)

Madam Speaker! To be able to express one's opinion in free and general elections is one of our democratic rights. Swedish citizens have good access to polling stations and have the opportunity to vote in advance. Persons who have difficulty reaching a polling station, for example due to failing health, can receive a home visit from a mobile voting officer. Those who are abroad can usually vote at their embassy.

The fact is that when I lived in Tanzania in the 1990s, so many hundreds of Swedish citizens worked as aid workers around the country that the embassy went around and gathered eligible voters at strategic locations.

With the proposals we are discussing today, accessibility will be further strengthened, and so will the security surrounding the election. One point is to clarify that Valmyndigheten is given the responsibility to support and coordinate the work regarding the protection of the election. The County Administrative Boards, the municipalities, and the foreign authorities that have polling stations shall promptly report incidents that could affect the conduct of the election. Also, the requirement for the accessibility of the voting procedure for all eligible voters shall be clarified.

In order for more voters to be able to vote, even at, for example, special youth homes, the possibility of voting through mobile polling stations will be expanded.

Furthermore, it will be required that poll workers are present when voters hire an assistant. This will reduce the risk of an assistant influencing which party's ballot the voter places in the envelope. It also prevents the risk of the assistant being suspected of manipulation. It is a security measure for both sides.

Another way to increase the possibility for eligible voters to actually vote is that Swedes living abroad who have lived abroad so long that they have fallen off the electoral roll should be able to vote early in Sweden. Through this, they will be re-included in the electoral roll.

When one arrives late on the speaking list, many others have already accounted for several of the details in the proposal. As has been revealed, the bill contains more points to strengthen security and accessibility at elections. I move for approval of the proposal in the committee report.

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

Jan Riise (MP)

Madam Speaker! As was just pointed out, much has already been raised, but I nevertheless request to read out a part of what I have noted down.

To be able to vote in free elections is a cornerstone of our democracy and in many other countries, but unfortunately not all. Democracy has, globally speaking, even regressed during the 2000s. Several countries have become autocracies, which means that the leader is elected in themselves but has then taken more and more of the power.

The majority of countries that we call democratic have proportional electoral systems. The composition of parliament reflects the entire breadth and thus also a wide spectrum of opinions, proposals, and openings for compromises and cooperation. It is perceived by many as more just that even smaller parties can be represented in the national parliaments. Personally, I am completely convinced that it is a good system – probably the best – even though there is room for improvements in many areas.

Madam Speaker! The Election Authority writes in the following way on its website: ”The Swedish electoral system is based on universal and equal suffrage and that elections are free, secret and direct. The electoral system is decentralized and transparent and therefore robust.” Universal and equal suffrage is a self-evident matter. Even if it is slightly outside the subject of this discussion, it can still be said that everyone under 18 is actually excluded from the right to participate. The 18-year limit admittedly has support among many, but more and more people have begun to consider whether perhaps even 16–18-year-olds should have the right to vote. My party has submitted a motion on this more than once and proposes that it be tested in some municipalities and regions. I will return to that in another debate.

Madam Speaker! The committee proposes, in accordance with the bill, that the Election Authority be given a greater responsibility to support and coordinate the electoral system. As far as I understand it, the practical consequence at the local level is that the smaller parties, such as mine and several others, are relieved of the purely logistical challenge of ensuring that there are ballots in all polling stations before a certain time on election day. I can reveal that in a municipality such as Kungsbacka, this concerns quite a few locations. A significant effort is made on the morning of election day.

Another point for us is that the distribution of ballots from the printing house to the parties is significantly simplified and that our election coordinators do not need to monitor deliveries from Postnord over several summer weeks. We think it is simpler with one address and one recipient. It should also be able to lead to a certain reduction in the number of ordered ballots, which of course is a desirable effect of the proposed changes.

Madam Speaker! It is naturally a self-evident matter that all citizens with the right to vote, that is to say those who have turned 18, should also be able to vote. But as the committee notes in the report, the provisions in the electoral act regarding accessibility are not particularly extensive. For persons with disabilities, both a lack of information and the design of the polling station can make it difficult to vote. There is clearly room for improvements here.

To begin with, it should be possible to see via the Election Authority's website how accessible the different polling stations for early voting are. For those who need manual assistance in carrying out the actual voting – to put ballots in envelopes – it is possible to vote with the help of an assistant. To further increase security and counteract any undue influence, it is now proposed that a poll worker should also be present to ensure that everything goes correctly.

Furthermore, we have the Swedes living abroad, whose conditions for voting are perceived by many as both awkward and insecure. Being dependent on a many times less reliable postal service is another challenge. In the report, it is proposed that Swedes living abroad should be able to vote early even in Sweden. This has not been possible previously but seems to be a reasonable order of things.

There are also proposals regarding changes concerning voting cards and early voting. I recall that I myself voted early without a voting card at Stockholm Central in 2022. One was simply printed there and then. I thought it was very practical with increased accessibility and without great risks of fraud. I should probably add that I showed identification.

Madam Speaker! Let me conclude with some thoughts on the right to vote as such. There are several different rankings of countries' democratic status, and generally speaking, the right to vote weighs very heavily in these rankings and in the compilation of a country's democratic standard. But there are also some differences that can be a bit thought-provoking.

Our own V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg measures democracy through a weighting of hundreds of indicators, whereby the right to vote is included in several. Universal and equal suffrage is a starting point, but also the proportion of eligible voters in a population and how easy or difficult it is to vote. In Sweden, we count on the proportion of young people under 18 being perhaps 17–18 percent, while the proportion in Africa south of the Sahara can be 45–50 percent.

Freedom House is another institute that measures who is allowed to vote and whether the inhabitants can participate on equal terms – that is, it uses a measure of how free and fair the elections are. They also investigate how likely it is that the opposition can actually win an election.

Both V-Dem and Freedom House also place great emphasis on the right to vote and the actual possibility of voting. So does The Economist, which also includes the concept of pluralism. This can be relevant to keep in mind in a discussion, just as the presence of multiple parties actually provides a greater breadth and more insights and opinions, which, taken as a whole, should result in a better society.

With this said, Madam Speaker, I thank you for the floor and move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and rejection of the reservations.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 14.)

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