Response to interpellation 2025/26:566 on democracy and human rights in Turkey

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! Carina Ödebrink has asked me what initiatives I and the government intend to take within the EU and the Council of Europe to increase the pressure on Turkey to respect the principles of the rule of law and the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights.

Furthermore, Carina Ödebrink has asked me how the government is working to support democratic civil society, free media, and human rights defenders in Turkey, and whether the government intends to work within the EU for clearer and more coordinated action against the recurring restrictions on the democratic rights of the opposition and civil society in Turkey.

Finally, Carina Ödebrink has asked me how I view the development where the judiciary is increasingly used against opposition politicians and regime critics in Turkey.

The Swedish government views with concern the shrinking democratic space, the many arrests taking place, and the legal proceedings against representatives of the opposition, civil society, and journalists in Turkey, including Istanbul's mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu. The government considers these arrests to be incompatible with democratic principles.

The court decision at the end of May to remove the leadership of Turkey's largest opposition party CHP, as well as the police intervention against its party headquarters, also raises serious questions about respect for human rights and about democratic development. With the help of our embassy in Ankara and our consulate general in Istanbul, we are closely following the processes that are ongoing.

A strong civil society, freedom of expression and association, and free media are prerequisites for a functioning democracy. Therefore, for many years, Sweden has had assistance to civil society, free and independent media, and human rights defenders in Turkey through both the embassy in Ankara and the consulate general in Istanbul. This is a clear position of the Swedish government. From the Swedish side, we last addressed the domestic political developments with Turkish representatives in July ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara.

Sweden has welcomed and taken a clear position on Turkey's long-term goal of becoming members of the EU and wants to actively work for a deepened relationship between Turkey and the EU. But that process is only possible if Turkey respects fundamental freedoms and rights and upholds the principles of the rule of law.

Sweden is a clear voice within the EU and the Council of Europe for respect for the rule of law principles, civil society, and the democratic rights of the opposition in Turkey. As recently as in June, we expressed concern at a ministerial committee meeting in the Council of Europe regarding the enforcement of the European Court of Human Rights' judgments that human rights defenders Osman Kavala and Selahattin Demirtaş are still deprived of their liberty, and underscored Turkey's obligation to enforce the European Court of Human Rights' judgment on their release. On June 17, we spoke in the Council of Europe about the democratic regression in the country and the decision to remove the CHP's party leadership led by Özgür Özel.

We will continue to point out when Turkey or other allies do not live up to their international commitments regarding human rights and democracy. We do not compromise on our principles, regardless of which country it concerns. We will continue this work within the EU, the Council of Europe, OSCE and the UN.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the answer to this important interpellation.

The Minister expresses concern over the developments and describes what is happening as incompatible with democratic principles. The Government is following the processes and raising the issues in various international contexts. This is good, but the problem is that the developments in Turkey continue in the wrong direction and, furthermore, at a rapid pace.

It has been barely two months since I submitted my interpellation. Since then, the situation has deteriorated further. The oppression of the opposition has continued and widened. It is no longer just about Ekrem İmamoğlu, even though the treatment of him is extremely serious. He is still being held in custody.

Now, a Turkish court has also ordered the platform X to block the account used for his presidential candidacy. It is not just about a single opposition politician. Over 20 mayors have been deprived of their liberty, and more than 80 municipalities have since the 2024 local elections been affected in various ways by measures that have changed the voters' outcome.

After a legal process against CHP's party congress, Özgür Özel has formed a new party. A large majority of CHP's parliamentarians have followed him. We are therefore seeing legal processes that have consequences for the very structure of the democratic opposition in Turkey. At the same time, press freedom is deteriorating. Turkey ranks 163 out of 180 countries in Reporters Without Borders' press freedom index. About 90 percent of the national media is judged to be under government control.

Mr. Speaker! It is against this background that I react to the language in the Minister's response. The Minister said that the government views the development with concern, that the government is following the processes closely and that Sweden is raising the issues. I do not doubt that the government is doing this. But just over a year ago, the Minister stood in this chamber and said roughly the same thing. Since then, the development has continued in the wrong direction. Then we must be able to ask: When is concern no longer enough?

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, of which Sweden is a part, has condemned Turkey's handling of the protests following İmamoğlu's arrest. The European Parliament has established that Turkey's EU process remains blocked because necessary democratic reforms are lacking. I can, however, find no instance where the Swedish government has publicly and clearly condemned the Turkish authorities' actions against the democratic opposition and against the deterioration of human rights.

Therefore, I want to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs: Has the Swedish government publicly condemned the actions of the Turkish authorities against the opposition? If the answer is no: Why not? What else is required for the government to speak out about a systematic attack on the democratic opposition?

(Applause)

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

Kadir Kasirga (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank my colleague Carina Ödebrink for taking the initiative for this important debate.

I want to highlight another dimension of the development in Turkey. Turkey is facing a historical crossroads. The Republic of Turkey's more than hundred-year history has been marked by military coups, political conflicts, and periods of extensive repression. For large parts of this history, Kurds' identity, language, and political rights have also been denied. For more than forty years, the armed conflict between the Turkish state and PKK has cost tens of thousands of people their lives.

Right now, however, we see something that we have not seen in a long time: a real hope that the armed conflict can come to an end. The process that is now taking place between the Turkish state and the PKK can become historic. We should welcome that, and Sweden should support it.

Mr. Speaker! Peace, however, is not just about the weapons falling silent. The big question is what comes after that. Will a century of denial of the Kurds' identity, language, and political rights come to an end? Will the peace process open the door for democratic reforms? Will people be able to speak their native language, express their identity, and organize themselves politically without fear? That is the real test of whether Turkey is moving towards a new democratic future. There is a contradiction here that worries me.

At the same time as there is a historical hope for peace, we see the democratic regression that Carina Ödebrink has described so clearly. Opposition politicians are deprived of their liberty, journalists and human rights defenders are imprisoned, pride is banned in Istanbul, and the judiciary is used in a way that raises very serious questions about the future of democracy.

Mr. Speaker! The Foreign Minister also notes in his response that the democratic space is shrinking and that Turkey still has not implemented the European Court of Human Rights' judgments regarding, among others, Selahattin Demirtaş. Therefore, it would be a very clear sign that Turkey truly wants to open a new chapter to release Selahattin Demirtaş, Figen Yüksekdağ and Istanbul's mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu and at the same time respect the European Court of Human Rights' decision.

Mr. Speaker! Turkey has a historical opportunity – from conflict to peace, from denial to recognition, from repression to democracy. But these three things must go together. Therefore, I would like to take the opportunity to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs: Does the government see the peace process also as an opportunity for a broader democratization of Turkey? And is the government prepared to clearly convey to Turkey's government that a lasting peace must also mean respect for the Kurds' linguistic, cultural, and political rights and a greater democratic space for the entire population of Turkey?

(Applause)

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

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! To begin with, I would like to thank Carina Ödebrink for an important interpellation. I believe that we are fundamentally in agreement on much. I also think that is a strength from the Swedish side. Then, one can, of course, stand here and debate exactly which word choices should be made.

I note that I have previously mentioned that the government views the recent domestic political developments in Turkey, where opposition members have been deprived of their liberty, with great seriousness. Respect for the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, including freedom of expression, democracy, and the principles of the rule of law, is absolutely crucial and, of course, also a prerequisite for EU membership. Citizens must be able to trust that courts make independent and impartial decisions based on current laws and evidence-based proof, not based on political interests or pressures.

Let me therefore be very clear: A strong, independent judiciary is not only a fundamental pillar in a functioning rule of law and a democracy, but also a central requirement for EU membership. Therefore, it is important that Sweden and the EU continue to clearly emphasize our expectations of Turkey precisely as a candidate country to the EU and the country's obligations as a member of the Council of Europe and a contracting party to the European Convention. Turkey must ensure an independent judiciary that stands free from political influence and that is not used as a tool to limit oppositional or regime-critical voices.

When it comes to the process with the PKK, it is of course very positive that it has now been declared that they are being dissolved and that a dialogue is being held with the party, but this process must take place peacefully and by democratic means. We are, of course, following this part very closely as well. Naturally, we also exert influence in all parts we can in order for it to go in a positive direction.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to seize upon a formulation in the Foreign Minister's response that I truly agree with. The Minister said that a strong civil society is a prerequisite for a functioning democracy. That is exactly right. Perhaps it is particularly important in a country where the democratic institutions are being weakened.

It also concerns groups that are particularly vulnerable. In last year's interpellation debate on Turkey, the situation for hbtqi persons was raised. Since then, the development has dramatically worsened. Several European human rights organizations warned as recently as April of an escalating repression against hbtqi activists and hbtqi organizations in Turkey. An organization for young people has been ordered to be dissolved, its representatives have been brought to justice, and there is continued concern about further repressive legislation.

This is important, because the democratic regression is felt in people's everyday lives – in the possibility to organize, to express who one is and to demand one's human rights.

This makes the government's policy difficult to understand. At the same time as the Foreign Minister emphasizes the importance of civil society, the total Swedish aid framework for Turkey is being reduced by a third. I want to be precise and say that this does not mean that the support specifically for civil society is decreasing by as much. I cannot infer that from what I have tried to bring forward.

The government's own new strategy says that civil society, democratic movements, independent media, and human rights defenders should be strengthened when democratic space shrinks. It even says that cooperation with state actors should be avoided and independent democratic actors prioritized in countries with serious democratic backsliding. It is a good principle, but then it must also have consequences. What is it, after all, that we see in Turkey today if not a democratic backsliding?

Mr. Speaker! Sweden cannot, of course, change the developments in Turkey alone. But Sweden is not powerless. We have aid. We are members of the EU, the Council of Europe, and the OSCE. We have diplomatic relations with Ankara. The Council of Europe has also shown that it is possible to speak more clearly.

That is why I wonder why Sweden is not more proactive. Why is the government content with following the developments when it could also try to influence them?

I want to ask the Minister: If a strong civil society is a prerequisite for democracy, why is the government reducing the total Swedish aid framework for Turkey just as the democratic space is shrinking? And what concrete initiatives has the government itself taken, not just participated in or stood behind, within the EU and the Council of Europe to increase the pressure on Turkey? For me, this is the difference between following a development and actually trying to change it.

(Applause)

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

Kadir Kasirga (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs for the cautious answer.

I still want to return to the very core of my question. Naturally, Sweden should welcome that an armed conflict lasting more than 40 years can come to an end. If people are spared from dying, if families are spared from burying their children and if politics can replace weapons, it is a historical progress. I would very much like to hear a clear welcome of this peace process and that it is supported.

But there are also other issues, as I mentioned in my first post. What comes after the weapons have fallen silent? The Kurdish question in Turkey did not arise with the PKK, and it will not automatically disappear if the PKK lays down its weapons. The question is also about the right to a mother tongue. It is about identity. It is about political representation. Ultimately, it is about democracy and equal rights.

That is why I mean that Sweden and the EU cannot merely be spectators to the process. We should support a peaceful development but also be clear about what is required for a lasting peace.

Selahattin Demirtaş is a clear example here. The Foreign Minister himself says in his interpellation response that Sweden in the Council of Europe has underlined Turkey's obligation to execute the European Court of Human Rights' judgment on his release.

Mr. Speaker! Turkey now has an opportunity that may not return for many years. Peace must also be felt in people's everyday lives – in their language, their rights, their political freedom, and their opportunity to participate in the democratic struggle. Therefore, I repeat my question: Is the government prepared to pursue exactly this perspective towards Turkey – that the peace process must be followed by concrete democratic reforms and respect for the Kurds' political rights?

(Applause)

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

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! I felt that Kadir Kasirga did not listen sufficiently, but I have been clear that it is obvious that we welcome the peace process. However, I raise a warning finger that it is naturally important that the process takes place in a peaceful manner, but we naturally support the peace process.

I also wonder if Carina Ödebrink actually listened. It is not just about us following the situation. I described in a long interpellation answer everything we are doing to exert further pressure. We are absolutely influencing – not just following.

I want to highlight three ways the government is working to support human rights in Turkey.

Firstly, I and my colleagues regularly raise MR issues bilaterally with Turkish representatives. This is not just about standing behind statements in different contexts, but also about conducting a tough dialogue with one's counterpart and setting demands.

Secondly, we work together with other countries within multilateral forums such as the Council of Europe, the UN and OSCE, which has also been raised in the debate earlier, in order to exert joint pressure.

For the third – and this is incredibly important – we provide support to civil society organizations and other international actors working for equality, freedom of expression, the rights of hbtqi persons, and the human rights of migrants.

Let me give a few more concrete examples. Ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara, we bilaterally raised questions regarding precisely journalists' accreditation and the need for free media. We clearly stated that freedom of expression is a fundamental human right in a democracy and that independent journalists must be able to scrutinize political meetings and decision-makers. Within the EU, we work for a common European voice. Often, we achieve greater impact if we sing in chorus compared to if we sing solo. I have already mentioned the work in the Council of Europe.

In addition, we in the EU made a joint statement earlier this summer in the UN's HR Council where we expressed strong concern over the democratic backsliding in Turkey. Through our aid, we support, among other things, women's shelters, independent media and journalists, projects that strengthen young people's political participation, as well as advocacy networks that work for freedom of expression and the principles of the rule of law.

Human rights are non-negotiable. Therefore, Sweden will continue to act clearly, consistently and actively in the work to defend and promote them in our relationship with Turkey. Here, I am pleased that there is such great support in the chamber of the Riksdag.

If one follows Carina Ödebrink's reasoning in the direction of the tangent, does she think we should terminate the cooperation we have with Turkey regarding crime fighting? We know that many who are behind the serious organized crime have moved from the Costa del Sol in Spain to Turkey, and we have been successful in reaching many of the key figures through that cooperation. I think it is important to promote Swedish interests, but Carina Ödebrink is welcome to answer how she views the issue.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now it is I who have written the interpellation, and it is I who am asking the questions. Now I received a question back from the Minister regarding the cooperation with Turkey concerning the fight against crime, and that is actually another question concerning a different subject. Of course, I think it is an important cooperation – so I have said that.

I thank you for the debate on this important issue, but my question remains: Where is and where can the decisiveness be found?

For a long time we have heard that the government views the development with concern, follows the processes, seeks dialogue and raises the issues. At the same time, we see a situation that is getting worse every day.

Turkey is an important partner to Sweden. It is a Nato ally, a member of the Council of Europe, and a candidate country for the EU – even if it has been put on pause. But if a country is of strategic importance, it cannot be paramount to demand and highlight the lack of human rights.

The Minister said that human rights are not negotiable. No, they are not. But then I think the government could be clearer. The Minister has not answered whether one has publicly condemned Turkey's actions. I have not received any answer on that. It would be an important signal on Sweden's part.

Where is the limit? What does the Minister of State think should happen further before one publicly and clearly condemns the attacks on the democratic opposition and on human rights?

(Applause)

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

Utrikesministern Maria Malmer Stenergard (M)

Mr. Speaker! Turkey is an ally within Nato and an important security policy actor. This does not prevent Sweden from continuing to react when Turkey does not live up to its international commitments or fails to implement the European Court of Human Rights' decisions. I have also very clearly accounted for all the measures that Sweden has taken.

Our partnership as an ally also gives us increased opportunities to communicate our positions directly to Turkey's representatives in parallel with our important aid cooperation, which I have also accounted for previously. We support, not least, the important civil society actors.

Sweden is today one of the few bilateral donors that continues to provide support to Turkish civil society organizations working to strengthen respect for human rights, democracy, and the principles of the rule of law. We are also active in the field of gender equality, where we have high competence and a good reputation.

Sweden will continue to work to ensure that human rights are respected in Turkey bilaterally and through the EU, the Council of Europe, OSCE and the UN.

Then I must conclude by saying that it is a total novelty to me that one is not allowed to ask follow-up questions as a Minister in a debate. It is an exciting interpretation of the very concept of debate. I hope that we will continue to debate the issue.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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