Non-discrimination

Participants noted that the reality of discrimination in Sweden was different from the idealised image often reflected by the country. Regarding the legal framework, participants agreed that the discrimination act did not cover all possible forms of discrimination, nor did it have specific provisions on discrimination by the police. The authorities confirmed that an inquiry was appointed by them to study the possibility of widening the scope of the act. Some participants expressed doubts over the independence of the newly established Swedish Institute for Human Rights. Lastly, most participants called for a reinforcement of the role and capacities of the equality ombudsman, while others pointed to the essential role played by CSOs in the domain. The authorities confirmed that the equality ombudsman would handle more cases, enhance dialogue with civil society and antidiscrimination bureaus (CSOs educating and assisting people with their rights) and increase knowledge about the law amongst the Swedish public.

Participants explained that persons with disabilities were not sufficiently considered in Swedish law and society. For example, no specific provision on discrimination against persons with disabilities existed in Swedish criminal law, making it more difficult to claim rights in court. Participants criticised the Swedish school system for not educating children about disabilities enough, and social services for not being sufficiently informed about the specific challenges and rights of persons with disabilities.

Participants felt that there was still substantial discrimination in Swedish law against rainbow families. For example, the proposed change to the gender recognition act put forth by the authorities was both welcomed by participants on principle, but also criticised for not going far enough. One participant explained that the identity card of a person undergoing the various required medical evaluations before being able to change legal gender, would not match them during that time. This could represent a period of humiliation for the person concerned and lead to identification issues. Participants also noted that senior LGBTQI persons faced discrimination when entering care homes due to a lack of concern for their specific needs. Moreover, they believed that the criteria to grant asylum based on sexual orientation or gender identity were not properly implemented, leading to the refusal of asylum to some LGBTQI persons.

Regarding gender equality, participants indicated that many issues persisted in Swedish society such as the pay gap, harassment and inequality in the treatment of women with disabilities compared to men with disabilities. A positive development was considered the good level of reporting of gender-based violence compared to most other countries, which consequently translated into the fact that Sweden 4/5 recorded one of the highest numbers of reported rapes in the world per year. Nevertheless, participants considered that the Swedish police and the judiciary were not trained well enough to deal with such crimes, as a shockingly low number of cases led to conviction.

Some of the bureaucratic obstacles to the integration of migrants, including through access to the work market, were outlined. Some participants felt that rejected asylum seekers who were stuck in Sweden, including state-less persons, were pushed into destitution by not being provided with accommodation, access to the labour market or financial support. Nevertheless, it was also mentioned that some undocumented persons were treated in CSO health centres.

Some participantsstrongly challenged the Swedish authorities' response to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination whereby Swedish legislation would effectively prohibit every form of racist expression.

While some participants acknowledged that the authoritiesregularly met with elderly civil society in the form of a pensioners committee, they also felt that over 65-year-olds were structurally discriminated against in Swedish society, as they were not considered in most laws and underrepresented in public institutions. Furthermore, it was expressed that children's rights were not considered enough in decision-making in Sweden.

The fact that Sweden did not ratify the International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention on indigenous peoples was also lamented. Some participants were concerned about a possible change of attitude by the Swedish authorities with regard to topics like ethnic and racial profiling, Muslim minorities, or disadvantaged children's rights. Representatives of CSOs working in these fields explained that they were worried about not receiving any more public funding. It was also hoped that the evaluation commissioned to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention on ethnic profiling by the Swedish police would be delivered.