Response to interpellation 2023/24:835 on tax funds to Islamists
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD considers a strong association life and religious communities to be a cornerstone of democracy 1. KD argues that organizations acting in conflict with society's fundamental values should not receive state support 1 and that the government is introducing clear democracy requirements to deny or withdraw grants 1 2. KD emphasizes that freedom of religion is important and that Muslims have the right to operate in Sweden 2 3 4. KD considers that the government and SD agree on supporting religious communities with a clear regulatory framework 4. SD argues that it is unacceptable for tax money to be paid out to organizations that spread Islamist ideology 5. SD considers that taxpayers should not pay for Islam to be given more space 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.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Madam Speaker! Nima Gholam Ali Pour has asked me if I intend to work for a larger mapping of how much tax money is paid out to Islamist organizations in Sweden. Nima Gholam Ali Pour has also asked me if I intend to work for the granting of tax money to Islamist organizations to cease.
Initially, I want to emphasize that a strong association life is a cornerstone of Swedish democracy. Support for association life and religious communities contributes to giving all people the same basic opportunities to be active in civil society and religious life and in this way be participants in Swedish society. At the same time, it is important that organizations that in different ways act in conflict with society's fundamental values should not be able to receive state support. This applies regardless of whether it concerns religious communities or other civil society organizations.
For the government, it is important that modern and legally secure conditions are introduced for state grant-giving that enable the authorities which review issues regarding state support to deny or withdraw grants to organizations that conduct activities that risk harming society. This spring, the government decided on the bill State support to religious communities and civil society - uniform and legally secure conditions (prop. 2023/24:119). In the bill, the government proposes a new democracy condition for state support to religious communities and support from the General Inheritance Fund. The government also makes the assessment that a democracy condition identical to the one proposed for support from the General Inheritance Fund should apply to other state grant-giving directed at civil society, if it is not unnecessary.
The Riksdag decided in June to adopt the bill. The new regulatory framework will enter into force on 1 January 2025 and will both enable better control of the religious communities and organizations that receive support from the state and make it easier to withdraw support in the event of actions in conflict with society's fundamental values.
The law enforcement authorities can already at this time intervene against persons active within organizations used for criminal purposes. The criminalized area has been expanded, among other things through the recently introduced crime of participation in a terrorist organization. The crime entails a special criminal liability for those who participate in the activities of a terrorist organization in a manner intended to promote, strengthen, or support the organization. The Government has also recently presented a new national strategy against violent extremism and terrorism to provide a long-term direction for the work locally, nationally, and internationally.
Another important issue is the assignment the government has given to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, Brå, to make preparations for the establishment of a central support function at the Center against Violent Extremism, CVE, at Brå (Ju2024/00674). The purpose of the support function is to prevent public funds from being distributed to violent extremism and other anti-democratic environments. The government intends to return with proposals for legislative amendments that will clarify the conditions for the support function.
Finally, I want to mention that the government intends to appoint an inquiry to review bans on foreign funding of, among other things, religious communities with links to Islamism and extremism.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! In a report that I ordered from the Riksdag's investigation service last year, it emerged that 1.9 billion kronor have been paid out to eleven Islamist organizations from state agencies and regions over a twenty-year period. It is of course much more tax money that is paid out both to Islamist and Muslim organizations in Sweden, but the investigation I refer to is therefore limited to eleven Islamist organizations. Furthermore, the municipalities' payments of tax money are not included. Nor is it all state agencies that have responded.
What the investigation shows is that the payment of tax funds to Islamist organizations amounts to billions, not millions. For most in Sweden, this is remarkable. It is not the case that most assume that their tax funds should end up with Islamists or Muslim organizations.
Just the eleven Islamist organizations that have received these 1.9 billion kronor over a twenty-year period have been marred by scandals. If we take Islamic Relief as an example, one of the board members in Islamic Relief's central organization resigned in 2020 after he described Egypt's president Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi as a "son of a Jewish prostitute" and called Israelis "grandchildren of monkeys and pigs." This board member was also the chairman of Islamic Relief in Australia.
Shortly thereafter, it was revealed that yet another board member of Islamic Relief's board had spread antisemitism. This time, it was the chairman of Islamic Relief Germany who had praised Hamas as "great men" who had "responded to the Muslim Brotherhood's divine and holy call."
He had also praised the organization's armed wing as heroes. German security authorities and researchers at the Swedish Defence University have established that Islamic Relief has links to the Muslim Brotherhood. According to the investigation that I refer to in the interpellation, Islamic Relief has received 1.3 billion kronor from Swedish taxpayers since 2005.
Despite the scandals, the support to Islamic Relief from Swedish authorities has neither ceased nor diminished. Review after review has shown that organizations receiving large sums of tax money in Sweden have links to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist organizations, as well as spread the Islamist ideology. The question is why tax money is paid out to these organizations when they spread such an ideology.
At the same time, I also want to mention the positive things that are happening thanks to this government, which is important to keep in mind. Today I was informed that the Folkbildningsrådet is defunding Ibn Rushd. It was about time. Just this year, two reports have been published by Region Stockholm and Region Skåne where it appears that stoning, misogyny, and homophobia are justified in Ibn Rushd's study material. So, it is going in the right direction when Ibn Rushd is defunded by Folkbildningsrådet. But there are still Islamist organizations that receive tax money, and that is not acceptable.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Madam Speaker! Initially, I want to say that the examples of antisemitism that Nima Gholam Ali Pour brings up here in the chamber are appalling. Naturally, no tax money should go to organizations so that they can engage in antisemitism. It is a poison in our society.
No one should feel threatened, but all people should have the opportunity to freely and together with others practice their religion and have their culture. This applies, of course, also to the Jewish minority, and the government stands up for this very clearly in all contexts.
I believe that my answer to the interpellation shows what the government is doing, and Nima Gholam Ali Pour also mentions this himself. We are now introducing clear democratic requirements that must be adhered to. Previously, there have been many different sets of regulations, but now it will be much clearer what applies. This gives the authorities better conditions to act against organizations that are Islamist and that advocate for parallel justice or that type of thing. The possibilities will now be significantly greater, and we can already see today that this type of change work from the government's side is having an effect.
Just as was mentioned here by the interpellator, the Folkbildningsrådet has also, against the background of the new rules, decided on the defunding of Ibn Rushds studieförbund. This is an important task, and it is also, of course, about securing the credibility of the grant systems. I think it is important that all religions in Sweden should be able to receive different types of support and be allowed to exist here. Freedom of religion is extremely important. But it is also a matter of us ensuring in different ways that support does not go to Islamist extremism in Sweden.
There we have several initiatives now. In addition to what I mentioned regarding the new conditions for grant-giving to civil society, it concerns the support function at CVE which is to help identify this. It does no good to have good conditions on a piece of paper; they must also be able to be implemented and function in practice. There, I believe that such a support function can have an important role.
Furthermore, we intend to appoint an inquiry to ensure that there is not, instead, extensive foreign financing of Islamist extremism in Sweden. It is also important so that we can curb the aberrations we also see in the religious environment.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! Year after year, authorities, regions, and municipalities continue to strengthen these Islamist organizations despite scandal after scandal emerging.
Already today, there is quite a lot of documentation regarding which organizations are Islamist and have connections to various dictatorships and to the Muslim Brotherhood. Many of the Islamist organizations that receive these billions have repeatedly appeared in the media's coverage. Some of the organizations engage in the Islamization of Swedish society.
Every year, Islamiska Fatwabyrån organizes a Muhammad march in Malmö. They also organize an Ashura march in memory of Imam Hussein's death. Who is Imam Hussein? Actually, it should be completely irrelevant because Sweden is not an Islamic country. But organizations like Islamiska Fatwabyrån are making Islam an ever larger part of the public space, and the taxpayers are paying for it.
Is it really the people's will to pay for this Islamization of Sweden? Should our tax money go to Muhammad marches in Malmö? The Government might say that the Islamic Fatwa Agency, which organizes these marches, is like any other Swedish association. But it is not. On their Facebook page, there is not a single word in Swedish; everyone speaks Arabic. Nevertheless, they have received approximately half a million kronor every year since 2017 from the Agency for Support to Religious Communities.
In other words, I can tell the people of Malmö that these Muhammad marches and Ashura processions, where black-clad Shiites march through Malmö, are entirely financed by the state and thus by the taxpayers. Many are probably wondering why. Why does the state want to finance Muhammad marches?
I have all respect for freedom of religion. But what happened to gathering in a house and praying together without burdening the taxpayers? The taxpayers are not financing freedom of religion and that a certain group should practice their religion today. The taxpayers are forced to finance the Islamists' increasing political influence and the Islamic marches that organizations such as the Islamic Fatwa Bureau carry out in Sweden's third largest city.
It is not fair. Why should the taxpayers finance such things? It is a question that I think the Minister should answer today.
The fact is that we are not told very much about these Islamist organizations that the taxpayers are financing. From time to time, it emerges that they have contacts with dictatorships in the Middle East or with the Muslim Brotherhood. Then it is forgotten, and tax money continues to be paid out to the same organizations. We have no idea what values these organizations represent. Suddenly they are there and marching in the streets to honor some Muhammad who lived in the Middle East in the 7th century.
What we do know, however, is that these Islamist organizations want to be seen and heard in the public sphere. They want political influence. They describe all criticism of Islam from the politicians' side as if it were Islamophobia. They want to limit our freedom of speech. These are political organizations with a political agenda.
Is this really something that taxpayers are going to have to finance?
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Madam Speaker! I believe it is good to be a bit precise when it comes to these issues. We have support for religious communities because it is an important part of religious freedom that religious communities have good opportunities to provide worship life, prayer and teaching for their members.
Religious communities also contribute a great deal on a general level in society. Not least in connection with crises and in matters of preparedness and other areas, they play an important role. They cooperate with authorities in various ways. Many of them were very important during the pandemic, for example when it came to disseminating information to their members. There is therefore a great value in that we have religious communities of different kinds in a country. It is about meeting the citizens' needs for places and contexts where one finds joy and can practice one's religion.
It is no coincidence that this is established in the UN Declaration of Human Rights. One should, both individually and together with others, have the opportunity to do this. Freedom of religion, of course, includes the right to public expressions of one's religion. Not everyone needs to agree with the expressions, but one has an opportunity and a right to go out and tell about one's religion and what one considers important and in that way try to influence other people.
With that said, the government has a very clear policy regarding countering Islamist extremism and also ensuring that money does not reach those types of organizations. One must manage both of these things.
We must safeguard freedom of religion and good conditions and prerequisites for religion—not just at home, but there must also be different types of churches and denominations. It is a strength for a country. There must be the possibility to opt out of religion entirely, of course. Not least for those who want to leave religions, it is incredibly important that that possibility exists. There must also be a right to religion. But we must, of course, not support Islamist extremism and other extremism that wants to build a parallel justice system and distances itself from human rights and democratic values. It does not have that place in society.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank the Minister for Social Affairs for the answer and for the debate today.
I have previously said that Islam is a foreign religion in Sweden. Actually, such a statement is not so controversial. Sweden is not a vacuum but has a history, culture, and values. Islam has not influenced any of this to a greater extent but is a relatively new phenomenon in the country.
Most Swedes do not know about the Islamic holidays, Islamic values, or what the Islamic message is. It is perfectly okay, because it is a foreign religion whose theologians sit and preach from Tehran, Riyadh, and Cairo. But then one wonders: Why do Swedish taxpayers need to pay for this religion to get more space and influence in Sweden?
No one is turning against freedom of religion. People can pray to whomever they want. But freedom of religion does not mean that taxpayers should pay for a certain religion to constantly be given more and more space and influence in society.
The worst thing is that the state does not even have a complete picture of where the tax funds go and what they are used for. It is strange that taxpayers in 2024 need to finance a Muhammed march in Malmö. This is not normal.
I mean that the state, and thus also the taxpayers, must get a better picture of how much tax money actually ends up with Islamists every year. It could be that the people's will is that Islamists should not be allowed to receive tax money, and then it must actually stop.
Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)
Madam Speaker! I would like to thank you for this debate, where I have had the opportunity to clarify the government's view on the importance of freedom of religion, that Muslims naturally have the right to be in and operate in Sweden and that different religions are important for different people. It is precisely in that order.
I have also accounted for several of the initiatives that the government has taken and continues to take regarding the fight against extremism, both Islamist and other, which threatens fundamental values. These fundamental values are important, not least so that we can uphold freedom of religion and also the possibility of, for example, leaving a religion, something that is completely fundamental in a democracy such as the Swedish one. These measures are now being implemented one by one and have already had an effect.
However, the government and the supporting party Sverigedemokraterna are in agreement: We support religious communities in Sweden, but we do so with a clear regulatory framework. We support civil society organizations, but we do so with a clear regulatory framework. We do this to safeguard the living Swedish civil society and to safeguard the religious communities' opportunities to be there for their members within these fundamental democratic values. In that case, it is also important that we combat different types of extremism.
Thank you for the debate! It will certainly continue in different ways.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.