Response to interpellation 2023/24:435 on the ban on conversion attempts
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that everyone should have the right to be who they are and that conversion attempts or conversion therapy must not occur within healthcare 1. M argues that the investigation did not deliver a basis for a sharp legislative proposal 2, and that one cannot be fast without a proper preparatory basis 3 4. M emphasizes that they are working on analyzing the existing basis to make a goal-rational decision 3 4 and that they agree that everyone should be able to live as they wish without being subjected to coercion 4. S believes that a ban on conversion attempts needs to be introduced 5 6 and that the motive behind the act should be criminalized 7. S regrets that the government is waiting for further basis instead of acting quickly 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro has asked me whether I and the government will present legislative changes that prohibit conversion attempts and conversion therapy, and if so, when the Riksdag can expect to receive those proposals.
Let me first state that everyone in Sweden shall have the right to be who they are and love whom they want. But for far too many, reality does not look like that today. Threats, hate, violence and harassment still limit hbtqi persons' opportunities to fully live freely and openly in our society.
Forcing a person to change or hide their sexual orientation or forcing a person to refrain from living in accordance with their sexual orientation or from expressing gender in the way the person themselves wishes is simply not acceptable. Such an action can be met by several different criminal classifications, such as unlawful deprivation of liberty, assault, or unlawful coercion. Conversion attempts or conversion therapy must also not occur within health and medical care.
For me and this government, it is of utmost importance that LGBTQI people receive the support and protection they need. The Gender Equality Authority has therefore been tasked with mapping LGBTQI people's vulnerability and risk of violence in close relationships, as well as proposing concrete measures aimed at both the target group and relevant professional groups. The government has also given the National Centre for Women's Peace a special assignment to operate a support telephone for trans people and non-binary people who are subjected to violence. Furthermore, intensive work is currently underway in the Government Offices to develop a new action plan for LGBTQI people's equal rights and opportunities.
We also see that LGBTQI persons are particularly vulnerable in honor contexts. From the government's side, we have stepped up the fight against the honor culture, and many measures have been taken recently. As recently as in January, we presented a proposal for an expanded travel ban aimed at protecting children from being taken abroad against their will and facing harm, including by being subjected to conversion attempts. Shortly thereafter, we also gave a special investigator a mandate to take a position on whether the sentencing for certain honor-related crimes should be tightened.
The investigation that Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro refers to was tasked with analyzing what criminal liability exists today regarding conversion attempts and taking a position on whether the criminal law protection should be strengthened. Based on its observations, the investigation has made the assessment that a specific regulation criminalizing conversion attempts should not be introduced. The report has been referred and is now being prepared further in the Government Offices. I do not want to anticipate the result of that process other than by stating that the fundamental question of hbtqi persons' right to live freely and openly in our society is very important. For that reason, it is important that both the proposals and the referral views are subject to a thorough analysis, which is why it is still too early to say when the government will take a position on the investigation's proposals and assessments.
Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer to my interpellation. But the answer worries me somewhat. In the Tidö Agreement, the only promise to LGBTQ+ persons was that the conditions for banning the phenomenon of conversion attempts would be investigated. I have on a number of occasions had debates and discussions with Minister Paulina Brandberg but have not received an answer as to what the government's position is. I was hoping for a bit more concreteness when I posed the question to the Department Head Strömmer instead.
It is clear that things must be investigated. We have an order in Sweden that I generally think is quite good: We investigate matters calmly, gather referral comments, and then make well-considered decisions. That is good. But it can be so that an investigation results in a proposal and the politics think something else. That is roughly what has happened in this case according to how I have perceived what Minister Brandberg has presented. They still want to collect some referral comments, but they lean towards wanting to ban conversion attempts. They just want to wait until the matter is prepared at the Government Offices.
Madam Speaker! 18 percent of young hbtqi people have experienced someone trying to influence their sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. This is only what we know – the dark figures are probably very high. To those of you listening to the debate and wondering what these conversion attempts actually are about, I can briefly say that it is when one tries to remove homosexuality from a person or tries to "cure" a person who feels with all their heart that they are living in the wrong body and are of another gender.
Why homosexuality exists and why some have gender dysphoria we do not know, but we know that hbtqi people exist. I naturally think that they have the right to their human rights like everyone else. The problem is that there are people who do not think so.
Conversion attempts can occur through physical violence and sexual violence. It can also be the case that one is sent abroad; Minister Strömmer touched upon proposals from the government to prevent this. But there have also been cases where medication has been used against children. Even though different parts of Swedish legislation today should be able to be used to address the problem, it is clear to me that a ban on conversion attempts needs to be introduced, because the methods themselves vary but the purpose is the same: to force a human being, a child or an adult, into something that the human being is not.
It is of course difficult for young people who have gender dysphoria, are homosexual or bisexual. That youth experiences not being accepted and constantly being different. To hate oneself is nothing that I believe anyone wishes for themselves. No one chooses to live such a life.
The problem is that it is society, people, and norms that create the circumstances that cause young hbtqi people to live a worse life than other young people do. That is exactly why it is important that politics takes the lead in order to change society. It does this by, for example, enacting legislation against those who attempt to change people and their identity.
Madam Speaker! I am convinced that the Minister agrees with me that conversion attempts are reprehensible and do not belong in Swedish democracy. But it is difficult for me to understand why the government cannot present a sharp proposal to ban conversion attempts when there is support in the chamber for it. It is the only LGBTQI reform that exists in the Tidö Agreement.
A number of other countries have criminalized conversion attempts. There are good examples that the government can look at. Is it not time for Sweden to do so as well? Or is it the case that the government is open to not banning conversion attempts in Sweden?
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro for the opportunity to discuss this very pressing issue in the chamber today.
First, I want to confirm that the Tidö Agreement is clear on this point. The need for legislative changes shall be investigated in order to ensure that conversion therapy under threat or by otherwise attempting to force someone to change their sexual orientation shall be prohibited. That is the starting point. That was also why we embraced the investigation that was already in place when we took office.
It is clear that the perception expressed in that context is a perception that my party, Moderaterna, has held firmly for a long time. It is our starting point. My problem is not primarily a lack of will on the part of the government or a lack of conviction among Moderaterna, but that the investigation commissioned by the Social Democratic government did not deliver such a proposal. That is the practical limitation for us in this situation.
The investigation that was supposed to handle that question has not delivered a basis that we can simply convert and turn into a sharp legislative proposal before the Chamber of the Riksdag. That is a reality. What we are doing is that we first receive the investigation and send it out for consultation. Now, various consultation bodies have commented on those questions, including the question we are now discussing. A serious process is underway where we are trying to untangle the questions in substance and see what possibility there is to move forward with different parts based on the investigation.
It is not an expression of a lack of ambition or a lack of determination, but rather a kind of investigative reality. The appointed investigation did not deliver what was requested on that point, even though it in itself was not so sharply formulated. It was a rather open question that was posed to the investigator.
Well, we are where we are, and we are working methodically with the questions. There is a point from the investigator. One can have different opinions about that, and that is what we are now analyzing. But it is important to say that very many of the problems we are now discussing are such things that we cannot accept in an open and free society.
Furthermore, there is a legal protection that affects many of these actions already today. What it is about in that case is to prohibit it in a specific order by clarifying or gathering the prohibition in one and the same clear place. Much of it is not permitted today.
I mentioned earlier that it can be hit by unlawful deprivation of liberty, assault, and unlawful coercion. I mentioned the extended travel ban that we are now pushing through precisely for purposes including protecting children against forced travel where they can be subjects of various types of conversion attempts.
Even in light of an investigation that did not deliver proposals on this point, there is a legal protection. We do quite a lot in other areas when it comes to related issues. Now we will do what we can based on the basis we have received. I promise that we will return to the interpellor and the chamber when our conclusions are ready on how we can proceed on that basis.
There is no doubt whatsoever that the problem we are discussing is serious. It is incredibly intrusive for the people who are affected by it.
Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)
Madam Speaker! I certainly share the Minister's concern regarding this phenomenon. It is the Riksdag that enacts laws in this country. If the political will exists, it can also be implemented.
We Social Democrats have, in a motion written by among others myself, proposed that conversion attempts should be prohibited. It has also been Social Democrats who have done this during previous parliamentary terms.
Madam Speaker! It is somewhat worrying that the government cannot be concrete about its intentions. I know very well what the Moderaterna said during the election campaign.
It cannot be claimed that conversion attempts are the same as, for example, assault, unlawful coercion, or other crimes, even if one can be prosecuted if one subjects a person to it. It can be exemplified with, for example, honor-related violence, which the Minister has touched upon previously. It is clear that it is illegal to kill or to beat one's daughter. It is illegal in Sweden. What we did in the summer of 2022 was that we said: Honor-related violence is a specific crime. The same logic and mindset can be applied to conversion attempts. That is what I just want to inform the Minister about. We have done that in Sweden previously. It is about the motive behind the act. That is what we want to criminalize.
One of the most vital parts of a democracy in a free society and a rule of law is all people's right to be able to live free lives. It is an inviolable life that is not defined by anyone other than oneself.
It is not reasonable that today in Sweden it is fully legal to have therapy sessions to gradually convince someone that there is something wrong with them because they are attracted to people of the same sex, or to try to have group sessions to cure people who feel: I was born in the wrong body. There should be no doubt in Sweden, especially for hbtqi youth, that we stand up for their right to be who they are. This is an important component of that.
Madam Speaker! It is usually the case that Sweden is not first with an LGBTQI reform in the world. We were not first with same-sex marriages. We were not first with ending the forced sterilization of trans people. We were not first with allowing same-sex couples to become parents. We will not be first with introducing a ban on conversion attempts, if it even happens during this parliamentary term.
In several countries, conversion attempts are already prohibited. Germany, France, Iceland, Malta, New Zealand, Canada, among others, have already banned it. There are good results that the government can look at for inspiration.
Regarding honor-related violence, as Gunnar Strömmer mentioned in his interpellation answer and in other answers, it is of course the case that the government is investing in working against it. It is good that those who are subjected to it receive the support they need. But it also applies that those who subject someone to it are prosecuted. I agree with that.
I do not know if Strömmer has taken part of MUCF's mapping, which the previous government commissioned them to carry out regarding conversion attempts and their scope. There, it is stated that conversion attempts cannot be traced to a phenomenon, a group, a religion, or a grouping. It occurs quite broadly in society among different groupings.
Madam Speaker! Gunnar Strömmer refers in his answer to that the Gender Equality Authority has been given a mandate to map the vulnerability of LGBTQI persons in close relationships. That is certainly good. But as I said earlier, such a mapping regarding conversion attempts has already been carried out. There are already fresh results that the Minister can take note of. That was what prompted the supplementary directives to the investigation Reinforced protection for personal integrity.
The Minister should have a fairly clear understanding of the situation for hbtqi persons and how they are subjected to conversion attempts today. What is Gunnar Strömmer doing as Department Head at the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the Police Authority, the Crime Victim Authority, the Public Legal Aid Authority, and Sweden's courts acquire knowledge of and provide support to those who, under current legislation, are subjected to this today?
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! Let me again confirm that we have received the same underlying material and the same reviews. We have jointly stood behind the supplementary directives that were given in the summer of 2022 to the investigation in question. The Moderates have confirmed this many times on their own, and it was also confirmed in the agreement between the coalition partners in connection with the formation of the government. It is, therefore, the direction of the policy. Unfortunately, the investigation we are now speaking about has not delivered a basis on this point, and that is where we stand.
Regarding what I do concretely at the department, I can say that we are now ensuring that the basis is prepared as well as it possibly can be. We take note of all the responses from the referral bodies and the analysis that has been submitted regarding the investigation, which covers more questions than the one we are currently discussing. Then we shall decide on the way forward.
Strictly speaking, there are two ways forward. The first is that, based on the investigation we have, we must say that we cannot submit a proposal regarding conversion therapy and that we, so to speak, content ourselves with the existing legal precedents regarding various actions, which in themselves apply more generally but also apply to this. The second way is that we conclude that we must obtain a preparatory basis in order to be able to submit a proposal to ban conversion therapy. Possibly there is also a third alternative, but strictly speaking, it is this choice we face. We are now preparing so that we can submit a well-considered answer to the question.
I believe, in every respect, that the analogy to the crimes against honor holds. I do not think it is strange to imagine that acts which are in themselves criminal should also be partially judged in a different light based on purpose and motive. It happens in other areas, and it can very well be thought to also happen in this area.
If we choose that path, we must then ensure that it can be done in an efficient way that also makes the protection stronger and better in practice than it is today. I wish we had had a basis to draw a secure conclusion in that part, but unfortunately, we do not based on the current investigation. But we are working on this right now.
Let me also say something regarding the authorities. When it comes to how the courts work with this, we of course have a dialogue with the courts, even if one maintains a proper distance to their way of working – not just with such questions but generally speaking – precisely because the courts must have an independence in relation to the government.
When it comes, however, to other authorities that we can control more immediately, for example the police, these are issues that are actualized both in regulatory letters and in mandates and agency governance, for the simple reason that it is of such an extraordinarily great public interest that these issues are handled in an initiated, offensive, and judicious manner by the police and other authorities.
Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the debate and for his commitment to an issue that is very important for the country's LGBTQI people.
I hope that Gunnar Strömmer understands what power he holds and what he can achieve if he simply wants to. I would like to take the opportunity to invite the minister to a seminar here in the Riksdag on February 29 at 8:00, where he can listen to people who have been subjected to conversion attempts and others who have expertise in the field.
For every day that the government waits, Madam Speaker, children are subjected to conversion attempts. These are children who are told that there is a demon living inside them and who need to undergo an exorcism as a result of it. These are young people who are cast out from an entire society until they speak with a priest, an imam, or some other religious leader to cure the illness they are claimed to have. It is absurd.
We Social Democrats believe that the phenomenon should be banned, and I regret that this was not discovered by politics earlier. Then perhaps we would have had a ban against conversion attempts today. That is what I regret, but now it is not so. Now it is Gunnar Strömmer who sits in power, and it is he who can ensure that this is realized. I and many with me are eager for it to be done quickly, because there are very many who are being exposed today. Instead, we shall wait.
But, Madam Speaker, it is possible to do things quickly if one wants to. When it comes, for example, to introducing visitation zones, it should go quickly. In that case, it doesn't matter that referral bodies have said that it is not so good, it should go quickly. But in a matter that would make life safer for hbtqi-persons, we shall wait. Then one must analyze and consider the whole thing.
It means that one takes a harder stance against certain phenomena in society, but not against all. In this case, it is hbtqi-persons who become particularly vulnerable.
Madam Speaker! A new breach of promise is emanating from the government. To QX, Ulf Kristersson said that a ban on conversion attempts will be a priority issue for the government. It is time for the government to prioritize. It is time for the government to introduce a ban on conversion attempts in Sweden.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! Once again, thanks to the interpellor for the opportunity to discuss this very pressing issue today!
Let me say something about the visitation zones. The reason we can be quick in that matter is that we have a proper preparatory basis. We appointed an inquiry that worked on the issue for twelve months and which also delivered a preparatory basis that enables a quick handling in the next stage. Without such a basis, it would naturally not have been possible to be quick.
So, it is not about an assessment of the level of urgency in different legislative projects, but it boils down in short to the question of whether one has a basis on which one can build serious legislation or whether one does not have it. I must unfortunately state that the investigation that the Social Democrats commissioned and the way in which the assignment was formulated did not succeed in delivering a basis that makes it possible to be fast.
On the other hand, we can analyze as quickly and thoroughly as possible the material we have received in the form of the investigation and in the form of the referral bodies' responses. That is what we are doing now.
I really want to assure both the interpellor, all citizens who are engaged in the issues, and all those who are personally immediately affected by the issue that the government will not hesitate for a moment in taking the step once we have made the assessment of what is the most rational way to proceed given the basis we have.
So, here at the end of our exchange of views and before the upcoming weekend, I would like to emphasize that we are, after all, in agreement on something extraordinarily important, namely that in Sweden, everyone should be able to live and love whomever they want and be who they are without having to be subjected to coercion and without having to change, hide, or refrain from living in accordance with their sexual orientation or expressing their gender in the way they themselves wish. Such an agreement is not a bad starting point when one is to make wise and, gradually, I hope, practical and effective decisions to strengthen the protection for people in a very vulnerable situation.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.