Response to interpellation 2025/26:71 on women's right to decide over their body and clothing
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns women's right to decide over their own bodies and clothing. L considers that equality means that women and men should have the same power to shape their lives 1 and that the compulsion to wear full-body clothing is an expression of honor-related violence 2. L argues that the fight against oppression must not restrict the individual's free choice 1. L considers that one must work harder against both racism and honor oppression 3. L argues that women are forced to wear garments such as the burqa and niqab 4. SD considers that the burqa and niqab symbolize obedience and should be removed from the country 5. SD considers that these garments are oppressive to women and must not be allowed 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.
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Madam Speaker! Lorena Delgado Varas has asked me if I consider that women in Sweden should have the full right to decide for themselves over their own bodies and clothing, regardless of religious or cultural background, how I and the government intend to ensure that Swedish laws and political statements are not used to legitimize discrimination or restriction of women's self-determination, what concrete measures I and the government intend to take to counter increasing Islamophobia and the control of Muslim women's bodies and clothing, and how I view the risk that Sweden's international commitments on women's rights and freedom of religion are undermined by political maneuvers from the government.
As Minister for Equality, I want to clearly clarify that the goal of equality policy is that women and men shall have the same power to shape society and their own lives. This applies to all girls and women in Sweden, regardless of cultural and religious background. The work is based on what is stipulated in the Swedish constitution, the anti-discrimination legislation, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, as well as international conventions such as for example the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, CEDAW, and the Council of Europe's Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, the Istanbul Convention.
The Government views with seriousness that Muslim girls and women can be affected by both honor-related violence and oppression and by anti-Muslim racism and hate crimes. Honor-related violence and oppression conflict with society's fundamental values and is today a serious social problem. It is also a very serious violation of people's fundamental free and human rights.
The patriarchal perceptions in a context of honor can, among other things, manifest in the form of control ranging from restrictions in everyday life regarding clothing, freedom of movement, social life, and choice of partner, to restrictions in the choice of education and future opportunities. It is a reality in today's Sweden that some girls and women are subjected to pressure, coercion, or control of their bodies, their clothing, or their behavior. It is something we can never accept. The Government continues to take powerful measures to protect the rights of girls and women, whether this occurs in a context of honor or not. The Government has introduced a new equality policy sub-goal that honor-related violence and oppression shall cease. An action plan for 2026–2028 will be developed and is currently being prepared within the Government Offices.
The government works to ensure support and protection for girls and women living under norms or situations where body and clothing choices are restricted or controlled. Freedom of religion and the principle of equal treatment shall always be respected, so that the fight against control and oppression does not become a reason to restrict the individual's free choice. In December last year, the government decided on an action plan against racism and hate crimes, with measures to counter racism, including anti-Muslim racism.
Girls' and women's right to live freely, without violence and oppression – to decide over their bodies, clothes, career choices and lives – is fundamental to a democratic society.
People's rights and opportunities in life shall not be limited by violence, racism and discrimination. I and the government are firmly determined to continue defending these rights every day.
Lorena Delgado Varas (-)
Madam Speaker! I cannot help but wonder how often one hears ministers trying to avoid the actual questions by talking about something else. The Minister spoke about equality – this fine word – but systematically avoided the central question regarding the government representatives' own statements, which restrict women's self-determination. The Minister speaks of honor-based violence, a real problem that I also combat. But it is used as a smokescreen to avoid taking responsibility for the government representatives' words on the niqab and burqa.
A woman told me how she was forced to take off her hijab, not because she wanted to, but because the hatred and discrimination became too great. She said: When the government says that it protects me while its rhetoric fuels the hatred, it feels like a double game against my body and me.
This is hypocrisy. You refer to CEDAW in the response, but you forget Article 5, which explicitly requires states to take measures against prejudices and practices based on ideas of women's subordination. When your government colleagues spread prejudices about Muslim women who need to be saved from their clothing, you are violating Sweden's international commitments. This is also being done in a context where Islamophobia is increasing significantly. The European Court of Human Rights has clearly established that the protection of freedom of religion is necessary in a democratic society. It must not just be political opportunism.
My questions to the minister are simple and direct. How many more women must sacrifice their religious identity before you take responsibility for the government's language? Do you stand behind the statement from government representatives that the niqab should be banned? How will you stop the appalling Islamophobia that is being created? It is increasing through this language.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! The interpellor has written some questions to the Minister regarding women's right to decide over their clothing. The background to these questions is not, for example, to criticize the Taliban for forcing women to wear the burqa or the mullahs in Iran for forcing women to wear the Muslim veil, but the background is instead the criticism that has emerged in Sweden against the burqa and niqab. So actually, the interpellor stands here and fights for women's right to wear the burqa and niqab.
A burqa is an outer garment that covers the entire body, including the eyes. A niqab is based on the same principle, but where the eyes can be shown. What characterizes this Islamic attire is that it is often forced upon women. It is probably not a surprise for most. There are few women who want to walk around in a sack and hide from the outside world. It is only a man who wants to oppress women who comes up with such a thing.
That is exactly why the burqa is used by the Taliban to oppress women in Afghanistan. It is not easy to be an active woman if one walks around in a burqa and niqab. Naturally, it leads to isolation. That is exactly why there are several countries that have banned the burqa. It is obvious that it is a way to oppress women and keep them in a permanent state of exclusion.
This oppression, this exclusion, is the only thing the interpellor defends today. There are not many women in Sweden today who fight for their right to wear a burqa. This is partly because there are not many women who want to fight for their right to be socially isolated, partly because there are not many women who want to fight to be oppressed.
Then one can also rightly ask the women who want to wear the burqa and niqab: What are you doing in Sweden? It is not to be rude. But honestly, if one wants to isolate oneself from the entire society and does not even want to show one's face to people, is one not in the wrong country? There are countries where bearded men encourage or force women to live in that way. Why don't you go to those countries?
Women can, of course, dress as they wish. But if we are aware that certain types of clothing are generally used to oppress women in other countries, we must take that into account. When clothing is used to control women's bodies, freedom, or visibility, it becomes a symbol of oppression.
One cannot ignore the context. One cannot ignore that the burqa and niqab are often used in Islamic countries to oppress women. It is not the women's choice in these countries to wear these garments. Women have no choice in these countries. The women who wear the burqa in Sweden often come from these countries.
It is not that the burqa at Sweden's border suddenly takes on another meaning and begins to mean something else. It is a way for men to control women and show that they own these women, just as one owns livestock. That kind of values has no place in Sweden.
Therefore, Madam Speaker, it is not women's freedom that is defended when one defends the burqa. It is the man's control over the woman that is defended. In Sweden, we stand up for women's freedom, not their oppression. In Sweden, no man, no religion, and no culture shall have the power to hide women's faces, limit their lives, or make them invisible.
Sara Gille (SD)
Madam Speaker! The Left Party has for over a hundred years described itself as a party that stands on the side of women. But when one examines its history and actions, one sees a consistent pattern. It has consistently supported regimes, movements, and ideologies that have restricted women's freedom, both in words and in actions.
Historically, the predecessors of the Left Party defended communist dictatorships such as the Soviet Union, East Germany, China, North Korea, Cuba, and Vietnam. These were regimes where women lacked basic rights. For decades, these states were called "people's democracies," even though in practice they controlled women's bodies, choices, work, and lives.
Vänsterpartiet has also praised regimes such as those in Nicaragua and Venezuela, where women's rights to free abortion, freedom of expression, and freedom of movement are strongly restricted. According to Svenska Dagbladet, the party has, through its international collaborations over nearly two decades, channeled around 12.5 million SEK to collaborative projects with non-reformed communist parties and authoritarian regimes worldwide.
Madam Speaker! Among the recipients are parties in Vietnam, the Philippines, and Colombia. These are environments where women have neither the right to organize freely nor to protest against abuses.
The same ideological blindness is seen in the Left Party's actions today. The party's former Member of Parliament Lorena Delgado Varas, elected on the Left Party's list, has continued that tradition in a modern form. She has worn the Palestinian scarf in the Riksdag in violation of the Speaker's rules, participated in activist actions against Israel, and used her parliamentary mandate to drive foreign policy campaigns about Gaza rather than the freedom of Swedish women.
She has also shared anti-Semitic material on social media with the text The Zionist Jews control the world, which led to a police report for hate speech and her expulsion from the party. But this only happened after a long period of silence and passivity from the Vänsterpartiet leadership.
The leader has also held rallies with a focus on Gaza and the Western world's guilt, but she has never highlighted the issue of the women who live under religious and patriarchal coercion in Sweden.
Madam Speaker! The burqa and niqab are used in several countries – such as Iran, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia – to hide women and control their behavior. The UN's Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has established that such coercion is gender discrimination, and the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that states may restrict full-face veils to protect equality and openness. Despite this, the Left Party (V) has consistently opposed every attempt to ban the burqa and niqab in Swedish schools and in public activities.
Madam Speaker! It is deeply problematic that a party and a member who claim to defend women's rights repeatedly side with those who restrict them. Vänsterpartiet has stood on the wrong side of history before and unfortunately continues to do so even today.
(THIRD DEPUTY SPEAKER: I remind you of the subject of the interpellation debate.)
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Madam Speaker! As a liberal Minister for Equality, my absolute starting point is that people should have the freedom to shape their own lives as they wish. This applies to both men and women as well as boys and girls. Restrictions on freedom regarding clothing should be handled carefully. But it is important that this discussion is conducted. Here we need to have several thoughts in our heads at the same time.
It is extremely problematic that in the debate, the veil is confused with the full-body burqa used, for example, in Afghanistan to oppress women. We have today a real problem with honor-related violence and oppression and the parts that affect women and girls in and by honor-related violence and oppression.
There is today a real possibility linked to the legislation. Today, there is a disguise ban that applies during demonstrations, where religious clothing is exempted. It is an example of when one can accept a ban for this type of covering of one's identity.
We also have that possibility of neutrality policies that employers have today. Depending on the type of professional activity in question, employers can set requirements for clothing and thus not allow either religious or other types of clothing for individuals who have a certain profession.
I believe it is extremely important to continue this discussion. We must work actively and counter racism and anti-Muslim racism wherever it arises, and we must also counter honor-related violence and oppression and increase the pressure against this.
Compulsion to wear a certain garment, such as full-body clothing, is an expression of honor-related violence and oppression and constitutes a serious violation of fundamental freedoms and human rights for women. Prohibition is a complex issue, and it is extremely important that we continue the discussion.
From the government's side, we take seriously that Muslim girls and women can be affected by both honor-related violence and oppression, as well as racism and hate crimes. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that everyone can feel safe being open about their identity. We can never allow racism to restrict people's rights and opportunities in life, just as we can never allow the oppression that honor norms constitute.
Lorena Delgado Varas (-)
Madam Speaker! That was a very strange statement from a previous speaker – a Member of Parliament who knows nothing about my political actions. I have fought for the right to abortion for very many years. I come from Chile, where abortions have been prohibited, and I was one of those who fought hard to get the right to abortion through there. So do not come and try to paint a picture of me that is not true!
I have been accused by members of the member's party of wearing a Hamas scarf here in the Riksdag. I do not know if you are aware of this, Madam Speaker, but there is an abortion rights scarf from Argentina. It is green and has, among other things, the gallows as a pattern. It was the gallows that many women used to perform abortions and risked their lives with. It was that scarf I was wearing, but unfortunately, the members of Sverigedemokraterna are not aware of such things. They do not talk much about women's rights, after all.
Let us return to the question. The overall goal of the Swedish equality policy is that women and men shall have the same power to shape society in their own lives, as the minister said. I think it is an incredibly fine goal, and I agree with every single part. But the goal must also include women who wear hijab, niqab, or burka. It must include all women.
I think things get mixed up when one tries to avoid talking about the fact that women actually have the right to decide if they want to wear a niqab and instead starts talking about the issue of honor violence. I think there are women in Sweden who want to be able to do that. When one starts placing these types of values on how women should or should not dress, it is very worrying. For what happens tomorrow when others, who perhaps want to go even further, take over the government?
I have seen it myself. During the dictatorship in Chile, the first thing the military did when they stepped out onto the street was to start demanding that women cut up their trousers. Women were not to wear trousers. If you worked as a secretary in Chile until the end of the 90s or the beginning of the 2000s, in certain offices you were not to wear certain shoes, but you were to have high heels and a short skirt. That was what suited a secretary.
I believe we do a disservice to equality when we start mixing these things together. One thing is to empower women, young people, and children to be able to use the expressions they want and go the way they want within religion and society. There is good work to be done there. Another thing is to force adult women to set aside their religious freedom. In that case, we are heading towards another type of society.
Nima Gholam Ali Pour (SD)
Madam Speaker! This is fundamentally not just about a garment. It is about the view of the woman as a human being.
In countries where the burqa and niqab are common, they do not symbolize freedom, but obedience. There, a woman's body and face are something to be hidden in order to protect men's honor. It is an idea that stands in direct conflict with the Swedish concept of equality. In Sweden, women should be able to live as free individuals. They should be able to look other people in the eye and be met as equals.
That is why we must dare to say that certain expressions do not belong here. Those expressions that restrict women's freedom must be removed from this country. We shall ensure that we defend women's freedom.
To relativize oppression in the name of religion is not tolerance; it is a betrayal. It is a betrayal of the women who in Iran, Afghanistan and other parts of the world risk their lives to escape wearing these garments. Sweden shall stand on their side. We shall be a country where women are not hidden away but are seen, heard and participate on the same terms as men. We shall be a country where freedom is not compromised away because someone calls oppression culture.
In Sweden, women's freedom is non-negotiable. It is part of our identity, as self-evident as democracy itself. It is our duty to defend it every time it is threatened, regardless of who tries to limit it.
Sara Gille (SD)
Madam Speaker! The niqab and burqa are garments that oppress women. They are garments that are about controlling girls and women and their sexuality because men cannot control themselves.
Here in Sweden, we fight against honor-related violence and oppression. If we really want to tackle this for real, we cannot allow these garments in Sweden. It is the same garments that women and girls in other countries are killed for if they take them off. The Sweden Democrats' line is clear: Women's freedom always stands above religious and cultural mandates. Sweden is a secular democracy, and Swedish law and equality apply to everyone without exception.
Madam Speaker! It is difficult to take Member Lorena Delgado Varas's gender equality rhetoric seriously when she time and again puts ideology before reality.
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Madam Speaker! Women have the right to wear the burqa, says Member Lorena Delgado Varas. It is remarkable to view this issue so one-sidedly. In all that is essential, which I have emphasized in my previous posts, women are forced to wear the form of garments that the burqa and niqab constitute. Therefore, we need to take the issue of honor-related violence and oppression with the utmost seriousness. If we truly safeguard women's opportunities to shape their lives as they wish themselves, that is where we need to both press on and continue to increase the parts that this government has initiated.
We have taken a firm stand against honor-related violence and oppression since day one across all policy areas. It is a task we need to continue with.
We have today, not least in the school's area, a number of missions and investigations aimed at being able to reach and strengthen girls who find themselves in contexts of honor-related violence and oppression. Among other things, Skolverket has a mission to strengthen the school's and preschool's systematic work against honor-related violence and oppression, for example through knowledge-raising measures and support for principals, teachers, and student health. Skolverket also has a mission to analyze preschools', schools', and headmasters' work with preventing, detecting, and addressing honor-related violence and oppression and also to propose a structure for the coordination of this important work.
In March, we also appointed an inquiry to propose measures to strengthen the work against honor-related violence and oppression in preschools, schools, and after-school centers. The assignment includes, among other things, proposing how an individually adapted support system for vulnerable children and students can be designed. We look forward to the inquiry's report during the next year.
In the directives to that investigation, one can read that it currently occurs that staff at preschools ensure that girls who wear a veil at the preschool do not take it off during the day, that children and pupils of different genders are not allowed to play or participate in certain activities together, that girls are not allowed to wear short sleeves or short trousers despite it being warm outside, and that boys are not allowed to dress in dresses when the children play different roles.
That staff are contributing to maintaining this is extremely serious and shows very clearly that we need to increase the pressure against honor-related violence and oppression, among other things through this investigation but also with many of all the measures that the government has taken so far and will continue to take.
Lorena Delgado Varas (-)
Madam Speaker! I completely agree that everything should be done to strengthen women's and girls' access to and power over society. On that, I am completely in agreement. I do, however, oppose the attempt to use certain women's clothing to signal against a general image of women's vulnerability. I mean that it is a political exploitation of certain women's experiences and lives. It does not strengthen their equality.
There, one might perhaps have to consider how one uses rhetoric and what it actually means – what it means when a minister goes out and says: Here we are going to ban these clothes. These people do not belong to society. What will it mean for those women? What more hate crimes will they have to endure the next day?
I want to see an equality policy that strengthens all women – regardless of religion, regardless of class and regardless of skin color. Therefore, I will never be silent when a politician tries to win space in the media by fostering racism, which is what this entails.
Honor violence we can talk about at another time, Minister for Equality, and how one should actually work with that issue. I have also worked with it. Coercion against certain groups is not what creates equality.
Jämställdhetsministern Nina Larsson (L)
Madam Speaker! For me, as a liberal Minister for Equality, the starting point is that the freedom to shape one's life as one wishes must prevail.
Restrictions on clothing need to be handled with care. These are complex issues. But again, it is extremely important that this debate is conducted, that we raise this discussion. We cannot separate the issues and pretend that honor-related violence and oppression have nothing to do with the matter. It is a completely decisive part of this.
I believe it is a mistake to mix up the veil, the very serious forms of racism and hate crimes that affect many Muslims today, and the type of degradation that is the very hallmark of the oppression of women that we see in Afghanistan. Just today we could read an article about the terrible misery those women live in.
We need to have several thoughts in our heads at the same time here. We need to continue to work actively and harder against racism and discrimination, but we must also work much harder against honor oppression so that men and women and girls and boys shall have the same conditions and the same opportunities to shape their lives as they wish.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.