Response to interpellation 2025/26:353 on stricter sanctions in cases of discrimination
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns stricter sanctions for discrimination. L argues that discrimination is a serious social problem that must be combated 1 and that the government is working on measures such as the pay transparency directive and the determination lawsuit 1. L emphasizes that the government takes the issue most seriously through action plans against racism and for the rights of hbtqi persons 2, confirms that intolerance is increasing 3 and that the government has increased the appropriation to the Equality Ombudsman 3. L argues that the government prioritizes strategies against antisemitism and continuously analyzes measures 4 3. S argues that discrimination is a widespread problem and that current law is not sufficient 5 6. S believes that sanctions should be tightened 6 and that it is serious that young girls are subjected to discrimination 5 7. S wants it to be profitable to take measures rather than to discriminate 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Adrian Magnusson has asked me how I view the issue of stricter sanctions in cases of discrimination and whether I and the government are prepared to act in light of the Equality Ombudsman's recommendation.
I would like to thank the member for the question and the commitment. It is important to safeguard people's equal rights and opportunities, especially in a time when human rights are questioned and challenged in several parts of the world.
Discrimination that stands in the way of people's equal rights and opportunities in life is a serious social problem and must continue to be combated. The Government has taken a number of measures to combat discrimination. For example, in the referral to the Council of Legislation regarding the implementation of the pay transparency directive, new sanctions are proposed for violations of the provisions resulting from the directive. Furthermore, the referral to the Council of Legislation proposes that anyone who considers themselves to have been discriminated against in violation of the Discrimination Act shall be entitled to bring an action to have that established. The proposal applies to all grounds of discrimination and to all social areas of the Discrimination Act.
It can also be mentioned that the question of sanctions for violations of the provisions of the Discrimination Act regarding preventive and promotional measures, so-called active measures, has been investigated. In the report Effective supervision of the Discrimination Act, the investigator judged that the current possibility of imposing a penalty charge was the most appropriate sanction.
There are currently no plans for any new review of sanctions in the area of discrimination.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thanks to Minister Nina Larsson for the answer! These are important questions. We are discussing two interpellations on discrimination here today.
Discrimination is unfortunately a widespread problem in Sweden. One wishes that were not the case, but it is actually far too many people here in the country who are subjected to discrimination in various ways, not least in working life and in the education system. If one were to doubt that fact – which I do not believe the Minister does – there is excellent material regarding what the situation is with discrimination in Sweden, namely the Equality Ombudsman's annual reports, which I assume the Minister takes part of when they arrive. The latest edition came in November 2025.
My interpellation and the question I have are based on this report and on the recommendations that the Equality Ombudsman has submitted to the government. One of the recommendations is to tighten the sanctions in cases of discrimination.
Why does the Equality Ombudsman then propose this? Well, unfortunately, we have a development in Sweden where the number of reports of discrimination is increasing, and they have increased over a long period. In 2024, 4,452 reports of discrimination were received. There are many young people who experience discrimination in Sweden, not least young girls. It is worrying. "Vulnerable position" might be the wrong expression to use, but young girls have it quite difficult in many ways in today's society. That they are then subjected to discrimination is obviously even more worrying.
Why then does the Equality Ombudsman propose that sanctions should be tightened when it comes to discrimination specifically? Well, as I said, the number of reported cases is increasing. The number of cases is also increasing in sectors where very much is already being done, for example, the working life. Many discrimination cases come from just the working life. Likewise, there are many who report that they have been subjected to discrimination within the education system.
In order to address this, the Equality Ombudsman therefore proposes that the sanctions should be reviewed. I am now speaking about what those who discriminate receive as a penalty – what they have to pay, or whatever it may be. This might cause the number of cases to decrease. It might cause employers, educational providers and others to do more to prevent discrimination.
Now, I am not going to blame Minister Larsson for what other ministers do in other departments. But this government has not made itself known as a government that lowers penalties. Rather, one tightens the penalties that one can reach, if I may put it that way. One is very harsh with different types of sanctions.
But in this case, the Minister explicitly states that they are not interested in further examining the recommendation that the Equality Ombudsman submitted just a few months ago. That they choose precisely that path may raise a great deal of questions. The Equality Ombudsman must still be seen as an authority in the field.
The government, or Minister Larsson and her party, have in many cases shown a high level of commitment regarding issues of discrimination, as we just heard in the previous interpellation debate. But just when it comes to tightening or looking further into the sanctions for discrimination, the government seems to be somewhat more cautious.
I wonder if the Minister can elaborate on this a bit. Why is there no interest in adopting the recommendation to tighten the sanctions? It comes from such an important authority in the field as the Equality Ombudsman.
Johanna Haraldsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Discrimination is a common and widespread problem, and the current law is not sufficient. This is what the Equality Ombudsman states in its report.
When so many people every year experience themselves as being discriminated against, we need sanctions that can effectively deter discrimination. We ask ourselves: How do we get individuals, companies, and others to better comply with the law? In that case, it is always close at hand to say that we should tighten the sanctions or tighten the penalties. Therefore, it is a bit strange that one is not even prepared to consider the proposal that now comes from the Discrimination Ombudsman regarding tightening the sanctions.
The question is also why. Why does one not want to review this issue? One does not even want to consider stricter sanctions.
The Minister refers in their answer to an investigation. I wonder a bit about the questions in that investigation. Here, reference is made to an investigation that proposes a number of different things. Those proposals have not been taken further either. But it is also linked to this matter regarding sanctions. Why is one not proceeding with this?
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, members, for the questions! I want to begin by clarifying that the government is continuously considering further measures against discrimination, and we take note of the views, positions, investigations, and proposals that come from both the Equality Ombudsman, whose views of course carry great weight in these matters, as well as from others.
What I expressed is that at the current moment, there is no ongoing work to investigate stricter sanctions in cases of discrimination. But to introduce additional measures, to expand the anti-discrimination legislation or to add new sanctions to the anti-discrimination legislation – which the government is now doing in the implementation of the pay transparency directive – is exactly the type of measures that we are working on and will continue to work on.
Just as Member of Parliament Adrian Magnusson pointed out, this is a broad area, and significant efforts are required in various places and aspects. It is not just about sanctions in the non-discrimination legislation but also about a number of other things. This is something that this government has taken most seriously.
It is about the action plan against racism, about the action plan for the freedoms and rights of hbtqi persons, about various assignments to strengthen meeting places for hbtqi persons, about the strategy against antisemitism and much, much more.
It is a polarized time we live in. This makes, just as both questioners are touching upon, this issue particularly important. This is because it has a completely central impact on our democracy, and this has to do with our freedom as a nation. It is connected to our resilience and our ability to reduce our vulnerabilities that we do not split society but work even harder for a society that holds together. An effective anti-discrimination work is therefore completely central.
As said: The Government is considering ongoing measures to counter discrimination, and DO's recommendations are something that I take with me in that work.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you to the Minister for the answer, or how one should put it, in the second entry!
I experienced it as that the Minister in that post wanted to slightly nuance the picture of the work on this issue at the department or within the Government Offices. The Minister meant that there is currently no work underway to investigate stricter sanctions. The Minister actually said in the interpellation response: There are currently no plans for any new review of sanctions in the area of discrimination. But it was good that the Minister could nuance that picture. One hopes, of course, that the government is constantly considering this type of measure, especially considering, as I mentioned in my previous post, the development we see in the area of discrimination with all more reported cases of discrimination and all more perceived cases of discrimination. I also mentioned that it is largely young people who feel discriminated against – young girls.
Given that it should be a society that holds together, as the Minister spoke about, it is serious if we have very many young people who experience that they are discriminated against in working life or in the education system.
We see above all young girls who have suffered quite badly in their workplaces. We had quite recently – now I know it was Minister Britz who commented on that specific incident – a case at a café chain here in Stockholm, where especially young female employees had suffered very badly. It can perhaps also be seen as discrimination.
The Minister raised in her contribution the work being done and spoke about the importance of working on different fronts and edges – so that is how I have written here. I believe that was how the Minister expressed herself. She highlighted, among other things, the work against racism and the perceived discrimination of hbtqi persons and those types of problems in society. I still thought she spoke quite well about the increased polarization in society and what it can do to a society.
Regardless of the work that the government may have carried out against racism and hate against hbtqi persons, we see that racism in society is increasing – I believe that most people experience that. The hate against hbtqi persons is also increasing in society. Then one could perhaps look at what the Equality Ombudsman proposes – that one should look at the sanctions for discrimination in order to further strengthen this work.
These things are not in contrast to each other. It is not the case that if one has a plan to combat hate against hbtqi-persons, one cannot work on sharpening the sanctions in perceived cases of discrimination. I think they could complement each other.
I may have misunderstood the Minister – in that case, I have no problem backing down. But I understood it as that the Minister, in his answer, pointed out that this with the declaratory action could be something – that one could obtain a ruling that one has been discriminated against. That can certainly feel very nice in the moment for the individual person, but it is absolutely no sanction. One only gets redress in court – that one has been subjected to discrimination. But as far as I can understand, it does not lead to any sanction for the one who discriminates.
One can always talk about sanctions such as shame or the like. But I do not believe that it is that type of sanction that the Equality Ombudsman intends in its recommendation, but it is simply other types of sanctions.
The Equality Ombudsman also highlights in its recommendation to the government the fact that today it may be cheaper to pay a sanction fee than to implement all the measures that may be required to reduce discrimination in the workplace. It should be a low-hanging fruit to ensure that it is at least not cheaper than implementing measures. It should actually pay to take measures and not pay to discriminate and receive a sanction.
Johanna Haraldsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! When one does not see that the regulations and sanctions one has are having sufficient effect, one actually needs to look at: What should we do instead? Do we need to tighten any legislation? Do we need to expand the sanctions? Do we need to introduce other measures to address the problem? It is not the case that discrimination is decreasing. It is increasing and broadening de facto, and more people feel themselves subjected to discrimination. It is different age groups and different other groups in society who repeatedly feel discriminated against.
In recent years, the Equality Ombudsman, in the report that my colleague highlighted, has become increasingly clear with its recommendations. The specific question of sanctions has not been recurring, but other issues have been raised. My question then is: Which other of these issues is one prepared to consider reviewing? There must be other initiatives. It may not have been that this was excluded, but it sounded very much like that one excluded specifically reviewing the sanctions. Are there then other initiatives that the Minister envisions, which would allow one to address these growing problems?
I return to the question: Why is there such a rejection of precisely these recommendations? The Minister is welcome to come back and elaborate on that a bit, as I did not think it became completely clear.
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Thanks to the members for the questions!
I want to start by confirming the picture that both are painting very well, linked to the extent of discrimination and the experience of racism and intolerance in society. There are a number of studies and reports that point to this. Most recently, I received a report from Forum för levande historia which shows young people's attitudes and intolerance. Intolerance is increasing towards hbtqi-persons, not least, but it is also other forms of increased intolerance. It is serious.
The polarization and what these reports, studies, and testimonies describe is something we must take most seriously. This is a completely central area to continue developing. It is about continuing to take measures to ensure that the anti-discrimination work is sharpened. It is also one of the reasons why, from the government's side, we have increased the appropriation to the Equality Ombudsman. We have given them a significant increase in the administrative grant. The way the Equality Ombudsman takes on cases and actively drives them is incredibly important. It functions as a norm against employers and others who, so to speak, commit discrimination. The Equality Ombudsman's work and continued work – and that we can strengthen it moving forward – is completely central. It is also the government's absolute priority.
There also lies the anti-discrimination work linked to pay transparency, which is the government's proposal for certain adjustments in the discrimination legislation. Even though a declaratory judgment is not a sanction per se, it is currently not possible to obtain such a declaration that discrimination has occurred if one has been paid a discrimination compensation. The government is now closing that gap.
We attach great importance to the Equality Ombudsman's various reports and the underlying data that come in, and we continuously analyze further measures. That there is currently no ongoing work on the sanctions side is because we are making other important prioritizations in the anti-discrimination work in the form of action plans and assignments, but also other preparatory work that is ongoing.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I think that a liberal Minister for Equality responsible for these issues should be able to present some more sharp proposals regarding what is being done about discrimination than what has emerged in this debate, especially when she concludes the latest contribution by saying that so much else is being done in the area. However, not many concrete examples are provided at the end other than that other preparatory work is ongoing. I think that one could do a bit more than that.
Something that I also found interesting, and which the Minister engaged in, was the discussion about the normative effect that the Equality Ombudsman's work can have. I can share that view, but in that case, the sanctions could also have a very strong normative effect. So, one thinks about criminal law, for example. Society shows, through how criminal law looks, which norms it considers important in society, which crimes it considers more despicable than others, which crimes should be condemned more, and so on. If the government and the liberal Minister for Equality wanted to show that they consider discrimination to be reprehensible, one could imagine that they would want to tighten the sanctions, just as the Equality Ombudsman proposes. That could also have a normative effect.
Something that has not appeared in the discussion so far is what this does for the person who is subjected to discrimination. The Minister has an additional two minutes and can perhaps reflect on that. In other cases, especially when it concerns criminal law, the government talks a lot about the crime victim perspective. It is almost as if it is more important than everything else. There are no other perspectives than the crime victim perspective. The Minister might think that I am exaggerating, but I can probably say that is how it is in the rhetoric sometimes.
In this case, very little is said about the crime victim. The Minister might want to reflect a bit on that question during the last two minutes.
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Many thanks to Member Adrian Magnusson for the commitment and the questions!
Even though I was brief at the end of my previous contribution, I have raised the issues earlier during this debate, so I had not intended to do so again. But now I am given the opportunity to do so.
Anti-discrimination work is completely central and prioritized also for this government. We have presented a number of action plans to counter racism and counter intolerance. We have the action plan against racism, where Forum för levande historia has a coordination mandate. Within the action plan, there are about twenty agencies that have specific mandates, and work continues to strengthen the knowledge base regarding this. We also have the action plan for the freedoms and rights of LGBTQI persons, where 13 LGBTQI strategic agencies have specific mandates with Jämställdhetsmyndigheten as the primary coordinator.
In addition, we have a number of further assignments, and we also have the specific strategy against antisemitism. Additionally, we have the proposals in the Council of State referral linked to expansion within the anti-discrimination legislation, for example when it concerns the claim for determination, which is a form of redress for crime victims.
The Government is continuously analyzing various measures to strengthen anti-discrimination work, and we will continue to do so.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.