Response to interpellation 2025/26:456 on organ trafficking
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 KD argues that the government strongly condemns organ trafficking and that all transplantations shall take place on an ethical basis based on voluntariness 1. KD emphasizes that Sweden is working to shorten healthcare queues and strengthen the national donation system to reduce the need for trips abroad 1. KD argues that the current legislation is purposeful and that patient confidentiality is important 1. KD argues that there are no indications that widespread problems with trips abroad for transplantation occur in Sweden 2. KD urges tax-funded actors to conduct thorough risk analyses before international collaborations 1. KD considers it difficult to find words for the disgust toward organ trafficking and that the issue should not be blown out of proportion as a widespread problem 3. KD argues that there are no indications that transplantations from other countries that require follow-up care in Sweden go under the radar 3. KD considers that it is at the EU level that the conditions exist to create regulatory frameworks for the tracking of organs 3. KD emphasizes that it is important to reduce the demand for healthcare abroad by increasing the number of Swedish donors and shortening the healthcare queues 4. 5 SD considers that Sweden should accede to the Santiago Convention 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! Nima Gholam Ali Pour has asked me if I intend to work towards criminalizing the receipt of organs that have been removed through coercion so that sanctions are also directed at the recipient, and if I intend to work towards the introduction of an order that ensures that the receipt of organs that has taken place abroad was carried out through voluntary organ donation.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour has also asked me if I intend to work for information exchange that enables healthcare providers and insurance companies to flag suspected cases of receiving involuntary organ donation and if I intend to work to stop collaborations between tax-funded institutions in Sweden and hospitals in China where involuntary organ harvesting is suspected to occur.
Let me first emphasize that the government strongly condemns all forms of trade in human organs, wherever it may occur in the world. It is an activity that violates the most fundamental human rights. Our starting point is that all transplantations shall take place on an ethical basis characterized by voluntariness and consent.
I would like to further point out that according to the Act (2006:351) on Genetic Integrity, it is prohibited to receive, give or provide compensation for an organ, mediate organs for compensation or in any other way engage in trade with organs. The penalty is a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. Also, according to the Penal Code, exploitation of another person for the purpose that he or she shall be subjected to removal of organs can, under certain conditions, constitute human trafficking. The penalty for human trafficking is imprisonment for at least two and at most ten years.
Sweden has further, in several international contexts, stood behind commitments regarding illegal organ trafficking. Sweden has, for example, ratified the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, where organ trafficking is covered by definition. Here, the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine can also be mentioned, which Sweden has signed and which contains both a ban on the commercialization of human body parts and human material, and a ban on the trade of human organs. Sweden also participates in the Council of Europe's network Netta, which aims to counter transplant abuse, improve coordination and information exchange regarding transplant tourism, and ensure that transplants occurring internationally are traceable, transparent, and follow ethical guidelines.
Sweden is actively working to reduce the incentives for patients to seek organ transplants abroad at all. This work is being carried out on two fronts, partly through the government's work to shorten healthcare queues, and partly by strengthening the healthcare system's work with donation of organs and tissues for transplantation and thereby increasing the number of donations at home.
The work to increase the number of donations has also been investigated by Socialstyrelsen in an agency assignment that was final-reported in 2025. This resulted in a national action plan for the healthcare system's work with organ donation, which is intended to strengthen coordination and efforts within and between regions so that more transplantations can be carried out (S2020/08099).
The question of information exchange between healthcare providers, insurance companies, and authorities concerns fundamental principles of patient confidentiality. It is of the utmost importance that patients feel trust in healthcare in order to be able to seek necessary follow-up care after a transplant. At the same time, it is necessary that suspicions of serious crime can be handled.
When it comes to any collaborations with Chinese hospitals or other institutions in countries where there are reports of involuntary organ harvesting, I can state that a great responsibility rests on Swedish actors. The Government expects tax-funded actors to conduct thorough risk analyses and ethical reviews before international collaborations. We encourage a dialogue where human rights constitute a central part of the collaboration. If there are concrete suspicions that a partner is involved in unethical activities, the collaboration should be reassessed or terminated.
The Government takes the allegations regarding so-called organ trafficking in China seriously and is concerned about the situation for human rights in China, which Sweden's Minister for Foreign Affairs has raised with his Chinese counterpart. The EU has also on several occasions raised the situation regarding the trade in human organs with Chinese representatives, for example in the EU's annual dialogue with China on human rights. The Government will continue to raise the situation for human rights and continue to work for a clear EU-wide action in issues concerning human rights in China.
In summary, it is the government's assessment that the current legislation is expedient, and we are following the developments in the area.
Sweden's primary contribution to stopping illegal organ trafficking today is to strengthen the own donation system by shortening healthcare queues and improving national coordination so that no Swedish patient should feel forced to turn to an illegal market, while we in international forums continue to set clear demands for respect for human integrity.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! For a long time, very serious allegations have been put forward that prisoners of conscience in the People's Republic of China have been subjected to involuntary organ harvesting.
The UN's special experts have expressed serious concern over credible information regarding abuses directed at, among others, religious, ethnic, and linguistic minorities. The independent investigation China Tribunal concluded that forced organ harvesting has occurred for a long time and to a significant extent, and that prisoners of conscience have been used as a source for organ transplants. That such extensive information could emerge despite the very limited transparency in China suggests that these are abuses of a significant scale.
There are several examples of people who have undergone organ transplants in China with remarkably short waiting times. There are also reports that have raised questions about how the transplantation system could have offered such availability.
These facts indicate that the communist regime in China has deprived people of the most private thing they have: their own bodies. We are talking about a dictatorship that in the most brutal way has deprived people of both their dignity and their lives. If similar facts had been presented regarding institutions in Europe, the demands for investigations, sanctions, and political measures would probably have been immediate.
Unfortunately, the world has all too often reacted with passivity and caution in the face of China's abuses. When an authoritarian system is accused of not even respecting people's right to their own bodies, the reaction must be significantly stronger.
When the abuses of dictatorships are normalized, democracy is weakened far beyond the dictatorships' own borders. If the rest of the world gets used to an order where not even people's bodies and organs are protected from state oppression, we are in the process of normalizing something that must never become normal. The question is: What can Sweden do to counteract this involuntary organ harvesting?
Today, it is unfortunately possible for Swedish citizens to travel to China and undergo organ transplantations in a system where, for a long time, very serious allegations have been made that organs have been provided through coercion or through abuses directed against prisoners of conscience and other vulnerable groups.
The person who deliberately receives an organ, despite knowledge that it may have been taken from another human being through coercion or serious human rights abuses, is not covered today by any specific regulation that targets exactly this action. This means that Swedish citizens can actively contribute to these abuses without being punished in any way for it.
There are countries, such as Spain, Belgium, Israel and Taiwan, which have adopted laws that target sanctions even against recipients of organs. Thus, these countries have criminalized organ trafficking based on coercion entirely. Sweden has chosen not to do so. The legislation that the Minister mentioned applies in Sweden, but it does not apply if the crime has occurred in China.
My question to the Minister for Health and Care is: Will the Minister work to ensure that Swedish citizens are prevented from contributing to these horrific abuses by directing sanctions against such involvement?
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! I completely agree with the disgust expressed in the interpellation regarding this type of task or action. I have a many-year commitment to issues specifically concerning human rights and the lack of such rights in China. In the capacity in which I am here, as Minister for Health and Social Affairs, I nevertheless want us to provide a slightly more nuanced picture of how the situation looks in Sweden and what Sweden can do.
We have problems with people waiting in queues to undergo organ transplantation. The work to be able to offer more people life-saving and life-improving care through organ transplantation is incredibly important. It also naturally reduces the demand to seek care abroad.
Despite the fact that we have approximately 30 people who pass away every year while waiting to be able to undergo an organ transplant, we do not actually see people from Sweden seeking abroad to any significant extent to undergo an organ transplant. The cases we are aware of are usually people who travel to their former home countries and possibly undergo a transplant with a connection to relatives who donate a kidney and so on.
That type of example exists, but it is incredibly few cases that we know of. For obvious reasons, we cannot know for certain if it occurs because we do not have access to that type of information.
Socialstyrelsen is the authority in Sweden responsible for cooperation within Europe and for following the issue here and also collecting data as well as possible, does not see that this would be a widespread problem in Sweden or that there is any occurrence to speak of, more than certain anecdotes and suspicions that can arise within healthcare.
In these few cases, with today's system, there would be a possibility to test it legally. As the law is formulated – that it is illegal to, for profit, hand over, receive or mediate biological material, including organs and tissue – it could be tested on the basis that there is a health benefit in this. It is not possible to say with certainty what the legislation covers or aims to handle because it simply has not been tested any time.
I would welcome such a review if a suspicious case is discovered, but there are no indications that one has found or seen reason to review cases in that way. It is a very difficult question. It is incredibly serious when it happens – incredibly! I truly hope it is not perceived as a question that is being downplayed.
I also want to nuance a bit the picture of how the EU acts or that there would be a tolerance towards this behavior. It does not do that at all, given that a number of conventions have been adopted and that cooperation at the EU level has truly been strengthened, with much higher requirements to be able to trace the entire transplantation chain and ensure that it is voluntariness that lies behind it.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! I have looked more closely at the legislation that the Minister refers to. It applies if the act itself is also illegal in the foreign country and does not mean that one can convict those who receive organs that other people have been deprived of by force in, for example, China. It must therefore be illegal in the country where the crime was committed.
There are countries that have already introduced laws so that their citizens do not contribute to the horrific acts that the communist regime in China engages in. Sweden can and should follow these countries' example. There are several countries known for having adopted just such laws. Traveling to China or any country and receiving organs that have been taken from other people by force is illegal in, for example, Belgium, Israel, and Taiwan.
One way to reduce the risk of Swedish citizens contributing to these abuses is better information exchange and clearer opportunities to report suspected cases. We have no such information exchange in Sweden. It is easy to travel to another country, receive organs taken from another person by force in a dictatorship, and then receive aftercare here in Sweden. It is easy to get away with it today.
If healthcare providers and insurance companies can flag cases where there is suspicion that organs have been provided through coercion or other serious human rights abuses, the relevant authorities can receive better information and more easily detect patterns. It seems we have not done this in Sweden.
It would also send an important signal that this is not something we will turn a blind eye to because people have a right to their own bodies. People have a right to their own organs. Today, this happens entirely in the shadows. The victims are forgotten while the Swedish citizens who may have contributed to this oppression receive aftercare here in Sweden.
At the same time, specific Chinese hospitals and transplantation environments have been identified in reports and investigations regarding these very serious abuses. Despite this, cooperation between Swedish institutions and such operations has in no way been countered. Cooperation still occurs between Swedish institutions and Chinese operations that have been linked to involuntary organ harvesting, which raises a fundamental question: Should Swedish universities, regions, and other tax-funded actors really cooperate with hospitals where there are serious and recurring reports of ongoing involuntary organ harvesting?
There must be no risk that Swedish tax money contributes to giving legitimacy to activities associated with very serious human rights abuses. If one does not take a stand against the involuntary organ harvesting in China, this will spread to other dictatorships – if it has not already done so.
We do not want to live in a world where it becomes common for political dissidents to be deprived of their organs by force. Already now, Sweden must take a stand against this. Already now, Sweden must say that this is not acceptable and that our society shall in no way contribute to this behavior.
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! Again: It is difficult to find words for the degree of disgust before this type of phenomenon. I just want to emphasize that. But I do not see any value in magnifying the issue as something that is a widespread problem.
Again: If someone in another country has undergone a transplantation that requires follow-up care in Sweden, it does not go under the radar. The care would come into contact with it precisely because it requires follow-up care, and there are currently no indications that this occurs here. That also means that such cases have not been tested.
When it comes to the possibility of testing this legally, it is actually, believe it or not, prohibited with organ trafficking in China. Over the last decades, a number of laws have been enacted that prohibit it, so from that perspective, it would be possible to test here. But that it is prohibited is obviously no guarantee that it does not occur. How that country acts and how widespread the lack of respect for human rights is there is something that we have to contend with and be vigilant against, which I also assume that universities and hospitals in Sweden do.
I completely agree with the interpellator that we should not cooperate with actors who engage in this type of behavior. But, again, it is at the EU level that the conditions exist to make an actual difference because we are then talking about slightly bigger muscles, slightly more countries, and slightly better conditions to actually establish regulatory frameworks for the tracking of organs and which healthcare one receives in other parts of the world. The conditions look better there. Work is ongoing there, and Sweden contributes to it and takes the issue most seriously. There is no room for any acceptance of organ theft.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! There is also international work to counter involuntary organ harvesting. The Government has reviewed some of the international work in which Sweden participates, but there is also the Council of Europe Convention against Trafficking in Human Organs, the Santiago Convention, which Sweden for some reason has not acceded to.
Despite all the documentation that exists regarding the involuntary organ harvesting in China, China is treated like any other transplant country by Swedish authorities. Here, the government has much to do. The least that can be done is to give assignments to the relevant authorities to at least treat China as one should treat a country that forcibly deprives people of their organs.
China is not a normal country today, and I do not think we should place such great trust in their legislation. It is a mafia state that treats some of its citizens as nothing more than biological assets. We are talking about a system where the human body is treated as a warehouse of spare parts. It is not just a violation of medical ethics; it is an attack against human dignity itself.
Sweden can do a lot. There is legislation that other countries have adopted to ensure that the country's citizens do not participate in this involuntary organ harvesting. Those countries have not looked at whether there are indications. Probably they have mapped out whether citizens from their countries travel to China, and then they have adopted legislation to prevent this. The Government says that there are no indications that Swedish citizens have traveled to China to receive organs that other people have been deprived of by force. In that case, one has not looked at and mapped this. One has not raised suspected cases.
As the Minister says: If demand decreases, the number of involuntary organ transplantations will also decrease.
Sjukvårdsministern Elisabet Lann (KD)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to the interpellor! I appreciate that the problems with the lack of human rights in China are being highlighted.
I also perceive that we agree that the most important thing is to reduce the demand altogether for care that can also be very risky. There is great value in being able to get the care one needs in Sweden, and therefore the work continues with increasing the number of those who are willing to donate by having established this action plan, but also with shortening the care queues and making care available to more people in order to simply save more lives and avoid a demand from people to travel abroad to get care.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.