Project Logo

Protection of Conscience Project

www.consciencelaws.org

Service, not Servitude
Proposed Protection of Conscience Laws
Sweden
Swedish flag

Sweden

Parliamentary Motions

Swedish members of parliament may, each fall, put forward such proposals during a "general motions period." The motions do not have legal weight and do not impose any obligations on parliament. However, they may bring some issues into focus, and, in the right circumstances, some may contribute to political developments in Sweden.

25 October, 2010: One of two motions supporting freedom of conscience for health care workers and institutions introduced in the Swedish parliamentary system following the passage of Resolution 1763 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. The motion proposes that the Swedish parliament advise the government to develop regulations consistent with Resolution 1763. The originator of the motion was Mikael Oscarsson (Christian Democrat), Deputy member of the Council of Europe Swedish Delegation. A motion put forward two days later by Hans Linde of the Left Party attacked Resolution 1763.

Following a debate on 11 May, 2011, the Swedish parliament rejected this motion, but affirmed that it was critical of the Resolution and believed that the Swedish delegation to the Council of Europe "should work to bring about a change in the nature of this resolution."


Swedish

Original Text (html) | (Word)

English

(Caution: machine translation)

Motion 2010/11:K381
Samvetsfrihet

Motion 2010/11:K381
Freedom of Conscience

Motion till riksdagen
2010/11:K381
av Mikael Oscarsson (KD)

Motion to Parliament
2010/11:K381
by Mikael Oscarsson (CD)

Samvetsfrihet

Freedom of Conscience

Förslag till riksdagsbeslut
Proposal for a Parliament decision

Riksdagen tillkännager för regeringen som sin mening vad som anförs i motionen om att ta fram föreskrifter i enlighet med EuroparÃ¥dets resolution 1763 (2010) om abort och samvetsfrihet

Parliament advises the Government of its opinion as stated in the motion on the development regulations in accordance with the Council of Europe Resolution 1763 (2010) about abortion and conscience

Motivering
Justification

Friheten inom ett mycket viktigt omrÃ¥de, den grundläggande samvetsfriheten, har sent omsider tydliggjorts och fastslagits av EuroparÃ¥det. Sverige är historiskt sett ett land som värnat denna frihet. Redan innan demokratin fick genomslag i vÃ¥rt land stadgades att kungen ej fick tvinga nÃ¥gon att agera emot sitt samvete eller lÃ¥ta andra göra det. SÃ¥ kom vid början av förra seklet den rättspositivistiska inställningen till lagstiftningen att fÃ¥ övertaget i vÃ¥rt land, och naturrättsligt grundade fri- och rättigheter ansÃ¥gs i positivismens mest extrema former endast vara metafysiskt nonsens. Mot bakgrund av förbrytelserna mot mänskligheten och civilisationen under andra världskrigets fick dock naturrätten en renässans genom de olika deklarationer och konventioner som därefter antogs i Europa och internationellt.

The freedom in a vital area, the basic freedom of conscience, has at last been clarified and established by the Council of Europe. Sweden is historically a country that has protected this freedom. Even before democracy was established in our country, the king was required not to compel anyone to act against their conscience or to allow others to do so. Then came the beginning of last century, when legal positivism became predominant in our country, and the most extreme forms of positivism viewed natural law-based rights and freedoms as mere metaphysical nonsense. With the experience of crimes against humanity and civilization committed during World War II, however, a renaissance of natural law occurred through the various declarations and conventions that were then adopted in Europe and internationally.

Europeiska konventionen om skydd för de mänskliga rättigheterna och de grundläggande friheterna stadgar sÃ¥ledes (art. 9):

"Var och en har rätt till tankefrihet, samvetsfrihet och religionsfrihet; denna rätt innefattar frihet att byta religion eller tro och frihet att ensam eller i gemenskap med andra, offentligt eller enskilt, utöva sin religion eller tro genom gudstjänst, undervisning, sedvänjor och ritualer."

European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms statute therefore (Art. 9):

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance."

Samvetsfriheten kom dock att Ã¥ter igen nedvärderas när en rätt till fri abort lagstadgades i Sverige under 1970-talet och de tankegÃ¥ngar som lÃ¥g till grund för denna fick allt större genomslag. Osäkerheten har därför varit stor i vilken mÃ¥n gynekologer, barnmorskor och annan sjukvÃ¥rdspersonal haft en rättighet att neka till att delta vid abort.

Freedom of conscience was, however, once again devalued with the establishment of a right to abortion under the law of Sweden in the 1970s and the growing impact of of ideas that led to this. There has, therefore, been considerable uncertainty as to the extent to which gynecologists, midwives and other health workers had a right to refuse to participate in abortion.

Därför är det välkommet att EuroparÃ¥det den 7 oktober 2010, utifrÃ¥n ett svenskt initiativ, tydliggjort hur artikel 9 i konventionen ska tolkas i detta avseende. EuroparÃ¥det understryker det behov som funnits att stadfästa rätten till att av samvetsskäl vägra delta vid abortverksamhet, även när denna är laglig.

It is therefore welcome that the European Council on 7 October 2010, based on a Swedish initiative, made ​​it clear how Article 9 of the Convention shall be interpreted in this regard. The European Council underlines the need
to confirm an existing right to refuse to participate in abortion activities, even when they are legal.

Resolutionen säger att inte vare sig en enskild person eller ett sjukhus kan tvingas utföra, upplÃ¥ta sina lokaler till, assistera vid eller bidra till en abort oavsett skäl. SÃ¥som resolutionstexten är skriven kan därmed inte heller nÃ¥gon tvingas tillhandahÃ¥lla de verksamma substanser som används vid en medicinsk abort. Samtidigt sägs att föreskrifter mÃ¥ste garantera att den kvinna som pÃ¥ laglig grund önskar avsluta en graviditet ocksÃ¥ kan fÃ¥ en abort utförd.
Dock fÃ¥r inte samvetsbetänkligheter att delta i abortverksamheten anses vara ett hinder för nÃ¥gon att anställas eller arbeta som exempelvis gynekolog vid en kvinnoklinik, dÃ¥ detta skulle vara diskriminering.

The resolution says that neither an individual or a hospital could be forced to perform, use their facilities, assist with or contribute to an abortion for any reason. The text of the resolution should also be applied in the case of someone who is asked to supply the drugs used for medical abortion. At the same time the resolution says that regulations must ensure that a woman who wishes to legally terminate a pregnancy can get an abortion done. Except that no conscientious objection to participation in abortion activities is deemed to be an obstacle for someone to be employed or work, as an example, a gynecologist at a women's clinic, which would be discrimination.

Resolution 1763 (2010) lyder i sin helhet (Källa: http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/ APFeaturesManager/defaultArtSiteView.asp?ID=950).

(URL invalid)

Resolution 1763 is quoted in English only.

1. No person, hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to an abortion, the performance of a human miscarriage, or euthanasia or any act which could cause the death of a human foetus or embryo, for any reason.

2. The Parliamentary Assembly emphasises the need to affirm the right of conscientious objection together with the responsibility of the state to ensure that patients are able to access lawful medical care in a timely manner. The Assembly is concerned that the unregulated use of conscientious objection may disproportionately affect women, notably those having low incomes or living in rural areas.

3. In the vast majority of Council of Europe member states, the practice of conscientious objection is adequately regulated. There is a comprehensive and clear legal and policy framework governing the practice of conscientious objection by healthcare providers ensuring that the interests and rights of individuals seeking legal medical services are respected, protected and fulfilled.

4. In view of member states' obligation to ensure access to lawful medical care and to protect the right to health, as well as the obligation to ensure respect for the right of freedom of thought, conscience and religion of healthcare providers, the Assembly invites Council of Europe member states to develop comprehensive and clear regulations that define and regulate conscientious objection with regard to health and medical services, which:

4.1. guarantee the right to conscientious objection in relation to participation in the procedure in question.

4.2. ensure that patients are informed of any objection in a timely manner and referred to another healthcare provider.

4.3. ensure that patients receive appropriate treatment, in particular in cases of emergency.

UtifrÃ¥n detta tydliggörande är det nu angeläget att svensk lag, dit ju Europakonventionen räknas, skyndsamt fÃ¥r genomslag inom omrÃ¥det. Det torde inte heller vara nÃ¥got problem för Sveriges regering att fullfölja EuroparÃ¥dets uppmaning till medlemsländerna att ta fram föreskrifter i enlighet med resolutionen. Som synes är det nÃ¥got av en salomonisk lösning EuroparÃ¥det kommit fram till, med respekt för bÃ¥da sidorna i en annars stundtals oförsonlig dispyt. Det är svÃ¥rt att se varför nÃ¥gon skulle motsätta sig föreskrifter i enlighet med resolutionen, dÃ¥ vi väl alla vill värna de mänskliga fri- och rättigheterna.

Based on this clarification, Swedish law, which includes, of course the European Convention, should now quickly have an impact in the field. It should not be a problem for the Swedish government to conform to the European Council's call on Member States to develop regulations in accordance with the resolution. The Council of Europe seems to have arrived at something of a Solomon solution, with respect for both sides in an otherwise sometimes irreconcilable dispute. It is hard to see why anyone would object to the regulations in accordance with the resolution, as we all want to uphold human rights and freedoms.

Stockholm
25 oktober 2010

Mikael Oscarsson (KD)

Stockholm
25 October, 2010

Mikael Oscarsson(CD)

 

Print Friendly and PDF