Hazel Press

General Assembly


Distr.: General


24 October 2014


Original: English



Human Rights Council

Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review

Twenty-first session

19 – 30 January 2015



Summary prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 and paragraph 5 of the annex to Council resolution 16/21




The present report is a summary of 24 stakeholders’ submissions1 to the universal periodic review. It follows the general guidelines adopted by the Human Rights Council in its decision 17/119. It does not contain any opinions, views or suggestions on the part of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), nor any judgement or determination in relation to specific claims. The information included herein has been systematically referenced in endnotes and, to the extent possible, the original texts have not been altered. As provided for in Human Rights Council resolution 16/21, where appropriate, a separate section is provided for contributions by the national human rights institution of the State under review that is accredited in full compliance with the Paris Principles. The full texts of all submissions received are available on the OHCHR website. The report has been prepared taking into consideration the periodicity of the review and developments during that period.



*The present document was not edited before being sent to United Nations translation services.


GE.14-19111  (E)



Information provided by stakeholders


1. Background and framework


1. Scope of international obligations 


1. United Nations Association-Sweden/Joint Submission 3 (UNA-Sweden/JS3) recommended that Sweden ratify the Optional Protocol to ICESCR.3 Council of Europe (CoE) reported that Sweden had not yet made a declaration enabling national NGOs to submit complaints under the Additional Protocol to the European Social Charter.4


2. The  Ombudsman  for  Children in Sweden (OC-Sweden),  recommended  that  the Government ratify the third Optional Protocol to the CRC on a communications procedure as soon as possible.5


3. The Sami Parliament in Sweden (Sametinget) recommended that the Government prioritize the immediate ratification of ILO C. 169.6


4. Church of Sweden (CoS) invited Sweden to ratify ILO C. 189 on decent work for domestic workers and increase efforts to ensure that migrant workers had the same legal protection from abuse as other workers.7


2. Constitutional and legislative framework


5. Regarding the implementation of an accepted recommendation from the first Universal Periodic Review (UPR) cycle,8 UNICEF Sweden welcomed the Government’s decision to appoint a commission mandated to consider the incorporation of the CRC into Swedish legislation.9 End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes-Sweden (ECPAT-Sweden) recommended full incorporation of the CRC in Swedish national legislation.10


6. UNA-Sweden/JS3  recommended  that  Sweden  introduce  legislation  explicitly banning torture in accordance with the definition of torture provided in the Convention Against Torture.11


7. UNA-Sweden/JS3 suggested that Sweden, in its legislation, include disability, gender identity and gender expression as motives for hate crime.12


3. Institutional and human rights infrastructure and policy measures


8. Referring to the implementation of four accepted UPR recommendations,13 UNA-Sweden/JS3 reported that the process to establish a national human rights institution had come to a full halt. It urged the Government to establish an independent national human rights institution appointed by Parliament, in accordance with the Paris Principles.14


9. Plan  International  recommended  that  Sweden  consider  providing  the  Children’s Ombudsman with the mandate to investigate individual complaints.15 UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended adoption of a national action plan, with clear and time bound goals and activities,  resources  and  follow-up  mechanisms,  to  implement  the  2010  Strategy  to Strengthen the Rights of the Child.16 CoS also identified the need for Swedish municipalities and authorities to develop and use child impact assessments.17


10. UNA-Sweden/JS3,18 JS2,19 and CoS20 expressed concern that the broad discretion given to municipalities reportedly led to the inconsistent fulfilment of human rights obligations. UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that Sweden take action to eliminate the disparities that prevailed between municipal services and children’s access to services.21


11. Plan-International recommended that Sweden continue to promote best practices and national policies banning corporal punishment.22


2. Cooperation with human rights mechanisms


12. JS5  recommended  that  Sweden  actively and  comprehensively participate  in  the Durban follow-up mechanisms of the United Nations, and support NGO participation in those mechanisms.23


3. Implementation of international human rights obligations, taking into account applicable international humanitarian law


1. Equality and non-discrimination 


13. Swedish Women’s Lobby (SWL) recommended that Sweden consider the possible reinstatement of the gender equality ombudsman.24


14. UNA-Sweden/JS3  observed  that  the  wage  gap  between  women  and  men  had essentially remained constant for 30 years and the labour market was markedly segregated.25 SWL recommended the implementation of effective measures to ensure full-time employment in sectors dominated by women; strengthening of professional geriatric care,  which  should  be  publically  funded;  making  professional  pre-school  facilities accessible to all and child care available outside normal working hours.26 UNA-Sweden/JS3 also proposed a system that required parents to share parental leave.27 UNA-Sweden/JS328 with CoS29 recommended that Sweden promote an equal balance of women and men at all levels of professional life.


15. Criticizing the deletion of the term “race” from the 2011 Instrument of Government,30 JS5 recommended that Sweden take immediate steps to restore “race” as a ground of discrimination, in compliance with ICERD, and the European Union Racial Equality Directive;31 and adopt and implement positive action measures based on race.32 UNA-Sweden/JS3 called on Sweden to gather data on ethnicity in a manner consistent with international human rights obligations, based on consent and respect for privacy and integrity.33


16. UNA-Sweden/JS3 stated that the daily racism faced by Afro-Swedes had a negative effect on trust in Swedish authorities and the ability to claim one’s rights.34 European Commission on Racism and Intolerance (CoE-ECRI) reported that a series of violent attacks in Malmö were perpetrated against persons with an immigrant background between late 2009 and October 2010.35 European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ) reported on riots allegedly by Muslim youth in Stockholm’s Husby suburb.36 JS5 referred to events in the town of Forserum, alleging that several families of Somali origin had been the victims of systematic Afrophobic discrimination and violence.37


17. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE/ODIHR), in its hate crimes report covering 2012, stated that 5,518 hate crimes were recorded by police and 344 cases prosecuted. These included: 2678 racist and xenophobic crimes; 111 hate crimes against Roma and Sinti; 132 anti-Semitic hate crimes;192 hate crimes motivated by bias against Muslims; 240 anti-religious hate crimes, and 537 crimes motivated by bias on the basis of sexual orientation and an additional 41 hate crimes targeting trans-gender persons.38 According to UNA-Sweden/JS3, statistics for 2012 showed that 64 percent of reported hate crimes were committed directly against the victims. The most common perpetrator of hate crimes with a xenophobic or racist motive allegedly belonged to the majority group.39


18. Although discriminatory ethnic profiling was unlawful, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (EU-FRA) reported there was evidence that it persisted in Sweden thereby contributing to the deterioration of social cohesion and to loss of trust in law enforcement.40 UNA-Sweden/JS3 reported that internal border controls targeting undocumented migrants had been heavily criticised, especially after it was revealed that 90 percent of controls conducted in Stockholm during one period were erroneous.41


19. EU-FRA reported on the discovery that police in southern Sweden had kept a register with the names of thousands of Roma Swedes.42 Observing that the Chancellor of Justice in 2014 issued a decision which confirmed that the register was illegal but did not address the aspect of ethnic discrimination and the potential for ethnic profiling,43 JS4 recommended that Sweden immediately put an end to ethnic profiling as a working method of the police and all other law enforcement staff.44


20. CoE-ECRI reported that xenophobic and islamophobic parties had gained ground over the past few years. Anti-Muslim political discourse had become more widespread and the tone had hardened. Online racism had continued to grow exponentially and antisemitic and islamophobic comment, including by some members of Parliament, had proliferated.45 Noting that general elections would be held in 2014, UNA-Sweden/JS3 expressed concern at troubling political violence, increased use of propaganda and support for the anti-immigration and anti-Muslim platform of specific political parties.46


21. Reporting that the prohibition against engaging in racist activities was not satisfactorily implemented and Sweden was in breach of ICERD, UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that Sweden: implement a ban on racist organizations and activities or take necessary legislative, policy and awareness-raising measures to ensure greater effectiveness of legislation on hate crimes; and introduce measures against racist propaganda, including on the Internet.47


2. Right to life, liberty and security of the person


22. JS4 reported that between January 2013 and May 2014 police interventions ended in the deaths of seven persons as a result of the use of firearms by the police. In the previous ten years a maximum of one person per year died under similar circumstances.48 JS4 recommended that Sweden undertake a thorough, impartial and speedy investigation into the increase of fatal police violence as a matter of urgency; immediately replace dumdum bullets with non-expanding ammunition for the police; revise the legal framework regulating the use of firearms and self-defence; improve the working methods of the police to minimise situations whereby the police had to resort to self-defence, and build specific competences regarding psychiatric illness; and establish a fully independent body in charge of investigating instances of police violence, bring those responsible to justice, and ensure the collection of comprehensive data on police use of firearms.49


23. CoE-Committee on the Prevention of Torture (CoE-CPT) emphasized that the issue of restrictions imposed on remand prisoners had been central to the dialogue between the CPT and the Swedish authorities since 1991. The types of restrictions which could be applied concerned: visits, phone calls, correspondence, contacts with other inmates, and access to newspapers, radio and television. Such restrictions were only to be permitted if there were a risk that the suspect would remove evidence or in other ways impede the investigation. At the court hearing concerning remand in custody, prosecutors did not have to present concrete evidence in support of the request for the imposition of restrictions, and the choice of specific restrictions was reportedly left to the discretion of prosecutors.50


24. JS6  reported  that  in  2013,  70  per  cent  of  the  9,415  people  placed  in  pre-trial detention in Sweden were placed under some form of restriction for some length of their detention.51 CoE-CPT stated that much remained to be done to ensure that the imposition of restrictions on remand prisoners was an exceptional measure rather than the rule. A proper balance should be struck between the needs of a criminal investigation and the rights of prisoners; further, restrictions should never be applied for the purpose of bringing pressure to bear on persons remanded in custody.52 JS6 was encouraged that a report by the Swedish Prosecution Authority published in January 2014 offered recommendations regarding the practice of imposing lengthy pre-trial detention and restrictions.53


25. OC-Sweden reported that restrictions on children were approved in all cases where the prosecutor had requested them (91 out of 108 cases).54 OC-Sweden recommended that the Government ensure that when a court decided to place a child on remand, it must make an individual assessment in each case as to which restrictions were necessary;55 and introduce time limits of 24 hours for a child to be held in a police cell and 30 day limit for pre-trial detention.56


26. OC-Sweden  stated  that  compulsory  care  and  coercive  measures  at  psychiatric facilities must distinguish between children/adolescents and adults and proceed from the rights of the child and recommended the review of legislation and coercive measures.57 OC-Sweden recommended that the Government abolish solitary confinement for children placed in special residential homes for young people.58


27. UNA-Sweden/JS3 reported that each year 13 to 20 women died at the hand of a partner.59 Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) indicated that safe shelter could not be provided to 63 per cent of women making such requests. WILPF recommended that the Government intensify its efforts to prevent violence against women, as well as support victims and survivors.60 SWL recommended that public funding be guaranteed for women’s and girls’ shelters.61


28. UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that Sweden monitor the implementation of its new legislation against forced and child marriage.62 SWL recommended that the Government prohibit surrogacy motherhood.63


29. UNA-Sweden/JS3 called on Sweden to reach out to children exposed to bullying in schools and on line.64


30. According to SWL, since the law against sex purchase was introduced in Sweden, demand had drastically diminished. However, investigations showed that 80 per cent of sex purchases by Swedish citizens occurred abroad. SWL recommended that the Government ensure that persons travelling abroad and purchasing sexual services should be prosecuted in Sweden;  and actively spread information on the Swedish model law to limit demand of purchasing sexual services within the EU and internationally.65 Expressing concern that the Sex Purchase Act did not differentiate between voluntary and involuntary sex work,66 Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights (RFSL) recommended that Sweden objectively evaluate all existing legislation affecting sex workers.67


31. Concerned that current legislation provided for the sentencing of perpetrators of commercial sexual abuse of children for the purchase of sex and not for the actual sexual offence, ECPAT-Sweden recommended, inter alia, revision of the legislation in that regard.68


32. While welcoming measures taken to combat trafficking and support its victims,69 CoE-the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CoE-GRETA), in 2014, referred to reports of cases of trafficking for forced begging, potentially involving children, and forced criminality in Sweden.70 UNICEF-Sweden recommended amendment of the Penal Code to provide clearly for the crime of trafficking in children.71


33. While welcoming Parliament’s recent decision to ratify the Arms Trade Treaty and noting Sweden’s status as an arms exporter, WILPF stated that it was crucial that Sweden apply solid criteria on preventing gender-based violence and violence against women in its process of risk assessment before authorizing any arms transfer.72


3. Administration of justice, including impunity, and the rule of law


34. Referring to accepted UPR recommendations on implementing legislation on hate crimes,73 JS4 reported that as of April 2013, legal action was taken in only 6 per cent of cases reported in 2011.74 CoE-ECRI reported that obstacles existed when it came to bringing to court cases of “agitation” against a national or ethnic group committed through the press or broadcast media, due to the dual screening of such cases by the Chancellor of Justice and the jury, and the fact that victims could not bring a private action if the Chancellor of Justice decided not to prosecute. CoE-ECRI reported that very few prosecutions were currently brought in such cases – a situation which could result in denial of access to justice.75


35. JS4 recommended that Sweden investigate the hurdles to legal action and remedy identified flaws urgently.76 JS4 stated as paramount that the good practices of the hate crime unit in Stockholm be replicated, developed, and given priority in the new national police organisation to ensure more effective work against hate crimes throughout the country.77


36. JS8 recalled that in December 2010, the Swedish authorities issued a European arrest warrant for Mr. Julian Assange.78 In June 2012 Mr. Assange sought asylum in an embassy of a third country in London, to seek diplomatic protection due to his allegedly well-founded fear of political persecution in another third country.79 Related concerns were raised by JS7.80


37. JS8 considered that the investigation initiated in 2010 against Mr. Assange was paralyzed  because  the  Swedish  prosecutor  had  no  will  to  use  the  mechanisms  of international cooperation established in the law,81 with particular reference being made to the possible use of videoconferencing.82 For JS8, this constituted a violation of the right to effective judicial protection and the right of a person not to give up asylum.83 JS6 reported that it was a routine practice for Swedish police or prosecutors to travel abroad to question suspects at the preliminary investigation phase.84 JS6 alleged that the failure of the prosecutor to question Mr. Assange in the Embassy of a third country in the capital of another third country, had dragged out his pre-trial investigation nearly four years in violation of provisions of the ICCPR and the ECHR.85


38. JS8 recommended that the State adopt legislative and other measures to ensure that the Swedish prosecutor conduct independent investigations, which do not violate the right to effective judicial protection and the right to due process; and which make use of the available mechanisms of international cooperation without discrimination.86 JS6 also recommended amendments to Sweden’s Judicial Code, including explicitly specifying a time limit for pre-trial proceedings.87 JS8 recommended that the State review the role played by the Swedish Prosecution and other Swedish authorities in the investigation launched in 2010 against Mr. Assange.88


39. OC-Sweden highlighted CoE-CPT’s criticism of Sweden for not informing young people deprived of their liberty of their rights.89 OC-Sweden recommended that the Government ensure that all children are guaranteed fundamental rights during the judicial process, including the possibility of the prompt appointment of a public defence counsel.90


40. OC-Sweden recommended that the Government establish an independent child representative to serve as an independent instance to which children and young people deprived of their liberty could turn with any complaints about how their human rights have been upheld during the process. The representative must be entitled to represent the child in court and have the right to pursue claims in court in order to secure damages for children who are deprived of their liberty.91


4. Right to privacy and family


41. With reference to an accepted UPR recommendation on monitoring application of the 2008 Surveillance Act to prevent any interference with the right to privacy,92 Privacy International (PI) reported that Sweden’s National Defence Radion Establishment (Sweden-FRA) was implicated in the untargeted interception of communications on a mass scale and the right to privacy had been undermined on multiple occasions since Sweden’s first UPR.93 PI recommended that Sweden undertake an evaluation of its communications surveillance laws, policies and practices against the International Principles for the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance; and progressively implement reforms to comply with those Principles.94 JS4 recommended that Sweden evaluate the results of surveillance on crime prevention, counter-terrorism, and national defence.95


5. Freedoms of religion or belief and right to participate in public and political life


42. Reporting  on  alleged  discriminatory  Governmental  acts  towards  Jehovah’s Witnesses, European Association of Jehovah’s Christian Witnesses (EAJCW) requested the Government, inter alia, to recognize their religious community as eligible to receive grants under the law providing for financial aid to religious communities.96


43. UNA-Sweden/JS3 stated that between 2008 and 2012 reported cases of “agitation” against a national or ethnic group with an anti-Semitic motive increased 114 per cent.97 ECLJ called on Sweden to continue developing programmes that would curb the rise in anti-Semitism.98


44. UNA-Sweden/JS3 reported that Muslims, the largest minority group in Sweden, were disproportionately targeted with harassment, verbal threats, sabotage and vandalism. According to UNA-Sweden/JS3, recent attacks on places of Muslim worship had caused deep anxiety in the community and a sense of alienation from Swedish society.99


45. UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that Sweden ensure adequate protection of the Muslim and Jewish minorities, including places of worship.100


46. CoS would like to see increased efforts to support civil society initiatives for bridge-building  between  people  of  different  origins  and  of  different  religions  through  local interfaith councils and support for interfaith youth projects.101 JS5 also called on Sweden to increase State grants to ethnically based organisations.102


47. EU-FRA noted that Sweden had ratified the CoE’s Convention on the Participation of Foreigners in Public Life at Local Level.103


6. Right to work and to just and favourable conditions of work 


48. JS5 reported on residential and employment segregation affecting Afro-Swedes.104 UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that special measures such as affirmative action should be taken to counteract ethnic discrimination in the labour market.105


7. Right to social security and to an adequate standard of living


49. Referring to non-compliance under the European Social Charter, CoE concluded that it had not been established that the minimum level of unemployment and sickness benefits were adequate.106


50. According to CoS, an issue of concern was poverty and financial hardship in some families and especially among families with single parents or where the parents were dealing with unemployment or health problems.107 UNA-Sweden/JS3 stated that Sweden was the Nordic country with the highest rate of children living in relative poverty (7.3 percent).108 Referring to an accepted UPR recommendation on reducing social exclusion,109 UNICEF-Sweden believed the Government should take a comprehensive and integrated approach to combat social exclusion, its consequences and underlying causes.110 UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that Sweden adopt a national action plan to combat child poverty and social exclusion, based on the CRC and the EU Commission recommendation “Investing in Children – breaking the cycle of disadvantage”.111


51. CoE-ECRI reported that de facto residential segregation still existed in Sweden, and its effects were compounded by discrimination in the housing market that particularly affected Roma, Muslims, Afro-Swedes and asylum seekers, contributing to educational inequality.112 CoE-ECRI recommended that the authorities adopt a plan of action to address de facto residential segregation as a matter of urgency. This plan should include a budget and adequate resources to achieve the goals set. It should enlist local authorities to play an active part in addressing de facto residential segregation. The action plan’s impact in practice should be evaluated regularly. These recommendations would be subject to an interim follow-up, within two years.113


52. CoS reported on the problem of children from poor families at risk of eviction and that in some municipalities more needed to be done to secure their non-eviction.114 JS4 recommended that Sweden immediately halt the forced evictions of Roma EU-migrants.115


8. Right to health


53. UNA-Sweden/JS3 indicated that undocumented migrants under, but not over, the age of 18 were to be provided the same health care standards as residents in the region.116 WILPF recommended that Swedish authorities ensure that all women giving birth in Sweden receive equal and adequate health care.117


54. While noting positively the removal in 2013 of forced sterilisation for people who wanted to change their legal gender,118 RFSL recommended that the Government ensure a change of legal gender has full effect in all areas of life, including as a parental marker; and ensure access to free gender affirming health care for all transgender people needing it.119


55. JS2 referred to the lack of knowledge of indigenous issues and cultural awareness among health care providers.120 RFSL recommended, inter alia, that health care services be accessible and appropriate for all young people, including young LGBT people.121


56. RFSL recommended that the Government review the Communicable Diseases Act to accord with UNAIDS recommendations on decriminalization of HIV.122


9. Right to education 


57. While acknowledging the Government’s positive steps to provide the right to education for all children in Sweden, CoS observed that some municipalities claimed that the EU-migrants were neither persons with residence nor undocumented and denied their children education.123 CoE-ECRI reported that according to civil society, educational segregation was on the increase and gaps between schools were widening.124 Catholic International Education Office (OIEC) recommended that Sweden continue to ensure the implementation of measures to eliminate discrimination at school against Sami, Roma, and migrant children;125 and ensure measures are taken to give more priority in applications for school enrolment of children with special needs and of children bullied in other schools.126


58. Referring to three accepted UPR recommendations relating to the right to education and aims of education,127 UNICEF-Sweden recommended that the Government enhance central follow-up to counteract education inequalities and include socially excluded children’s perspectives in decision-making regarding the school system; exert closer central control in order to strengthen the work against discrimination and harassment in schools; and develop a long term strategy on how to build the capacity of schools to implement the CRC.128


59. OIEC referred to particular difficulties faced by some parents interested in faith based schooling, including home tutoring,129 and made a recommendation to address the needs of such parents.130


10. Cultural rights 


60. JS2 noted that the protection and promotion of Yiddish and Romani Chib was still very weak.131 To save threatened Sami languages in Sweden there was reportedly a need for a sufficient number of new first language Sami speakers.132 CoE-Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention (CoE-ACFC) recommended that Sweden remove the requirement that children have “basic knowledge” of their national minority language in order to receive mother tongue instruction in this language as part of their compulsory schooling; and strengthen efforts to address the lack of minority language teachers.133 CoE recommended that the Swedish authorities increase the availability of bilingual education in Finnish and Sami and establish bilingual education in Meänkieli.134


11. Persons with disabilities


61. UNA-Sweden/JS3 reported that there were well-documented discrepancies in health care provided to persons with disabilities. The number of persons who had their assistance benefit withdrawn by the Swedish Social Insurance Agency had increased considerably from 2010 and onwards. A Swedish independent national human rights institution was needed to monitor the Government’s compliance with CRPD and ensure that education on the CRPD is provided to the judiciary and all relevant authorities.135 UNA-Sweden/JS3 also recommended that Sweden: legislate inaccessibility as a ground for discrimination in line with article 5 of CRPD; take active measures to increase the number of employed persons with reduced work capacity in the public sector; and take steps to ensure the right to personal assistance and to boost the standard and equal provision of social welfare services among municipalities.136


12. Minorities and indigenous peoples


62. CoE-ACFC noted that the Sami, Swedish Finns, Tornedalers, the Jews and the Roma were covered by the Framework Convention on National Minorities.137 According to JS2, the responsibilities of municipalities, county councils and government agencies need to be clarified in the Minority Act in order to improve its implementation.138


63. JS4 reported that, for almost 20 years, the Governments and the Sami Parliaments in the three Nordic countries, including Sweden, had discussed and negotiated a Nordic Sami convention.139 With reference to six accepted UPR recommendations on the rights of indigenous peoples,140 Sametinget stated that such negotiations should be finalized no later than 2016 and recommended that the Government urgently finalize and ratify the Nordic Sami convention.141


64. CoE-ACFC stated that although the Sami Parliament was a popularly elected body, its key function remained that of a state agency responsible for administering policies decided by the Riksdag and the central Government. Reportedly, that situation might result in conflicts between its political and administrative functions; and its role in decision making processes on issues affecting the land and traditional activities of the Sami people remained limited.142 JS2 underlined that the politically elected part of the Sami Parliament had a very small budget which hampered efforts to draft a proposal for how indigenous self-determination should be developed.143 CoE-ACFC recommended that Sweden immediately take steps to ensure that the Sami Parliament is able to participate effectively in decision-making processes in all areas affecting the Sami people.144


65. While a 2011 Constitutional amendment specifically recognized the Sami people, JS2 reported that the situation of the Sami had become more difficult in the past few years.145 JS1 referred to recent examples of mineral extraction which allegedly violated Sami rights.146 Three concessions for mineral extraction at Rönnbäcken were granted to IGE Nordic AB in 2010. The case was taken to the Supreme Administrative Court, which revoked the Government’s decision in 2012, arguing that the Government had failed to weigh both the national interests of reindeer husbandry and mineral extraction against each other in the light of the Environmental Act. In 2013, the Government approved the concessions.147 In another case, JS1 reported that two Sami organizations appealed to the UN CERD Committee alleging that another company planned to exploit parts of their reindeer grazing grounds.148


66. JS1 recommended that Sweden involve Sami organizations at the earliest possible stages when any exploitation of traditional lands are planned and give the Sami Parliament authority to influence processes when conflicts around land rights arise and ensure the rights in the UN Declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples are secured.149 Sametinget recommended that the Government implement the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent in all matters relating to the Sami as an indigenous people.150 JS4 recommended that Sweden place a moratorium on all extractive industries in traditional Sami territory until ratification of ILO Convention 169 and the finalisation and adoption of the Nordic Sami convention.151


67. Referring to accepted UPR recommendations on additional measures taken to combat discrimination against the Roma,152 JS4 acknowledged the launching of a Roma strategy, which focussed primarily on actions and the potential of the Roma themselves, rather than on suggesting measures for changing the attitudes and behaviour of the majority population and state institutions.153 CoE-ACFC recommended that Sweden involve Roma directly in ensuring the successful implementation of the Strategy for Roma Inclusion 2012-2032 and allocate adequate resources to achieving the desired outcomes.154 JS4 recommended that Sweden improve access to justice for Roma.155


13. Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers


68. CoE-ECRI acknowledged that a law on labour market entry of newly arrived immigrants was passed in 2010.156 UNICEF-Sweden welcomed the Government’s acknowledgement of undocumented children’s rights to health care and education through legal amendments entering into force in 2013.157 UNICEF-Sweden recommended that the Government ensure that undocumented children are given access to health care and education in practice.158


69. Referring to three accepted recommendations relating to children in migration,159 UNICEF-Sweden stated that while the best interests of the child had been inserted into the


Aliens Act, they were not given actual weight in decision-making regarding children in migration.160 UNA-Sweden/JS3 added that the best interest principle was not fully considered in cases of family reunification; and the quality of care for unaccompanied minors varied greatly between municipalities.161 UNICEF-Sweden recommended that the Government: amend the Aliens Act to expressly refer to child specific forms of persecution162 and to ensure that no child was expelled or deported while in need of care due to negligence and/or domestic violence; and strengthen the collaboration between authorities involved in cases regarding migrant children in care.163


70. CoE-GRETA recommended that Sweden should address the problem of unaccompanied minors going missing, by providing suitable safe accommodation and adequately trained supervisors or foster parents, and ensure the timely identification of victims of trafficking among such children.164


71. Observing that Roma were one of the most marginalised and persecuted groups in Europe,165 JS4 recommended that Sweden ensure that EU and non-EU nationals of Roma background are treated on equal terms with others in the asylum process.166


72. CoE-ECRI observed that some problems remained to be resolved in the field of asylum law, as regards the quality of decisions at first instance, refusal of entry and non-refoulement. Returns to some countries reportedly did not always take account of the risks facing individuals due to their ethnicity or religious beliefs. The requirement that persons wishing to qualify for family reunification produce identity papers also placed a disproportionate burden on natives of some countries in which the situation made the issuance of such papers virtually impossible.167


73. Referring to decisions of the UN Committee against Torture, UNA-Sweden/JS3 recommended that Sweden ensure the rule of law in asylum proceedings, and avoid the use of general country information to fully guarantee respect for the principle of non-refoulement.168


14. Right to development, and environmental issues


74. Referring   to   accepted   UPR   recommendations   relating   to   development cooperation,169 Plan-International recommended that Sweden in its development cooperation: ensure that child rights are mainstreamed170 by systematically performing child impact assessments;171 develop, in full collaboration with children, young people, and civil society organizations, a policy on disaster risk reduction;172 develop a strategy on child protection;173 and promote the importance of children’s and young people’s sexual and reproductive health and rights in its policies and international political dialogues.174


15. Human rights and counter-terrorism


75. UNA-Sweden/JS3  stated  that  Sweden  should  refrain  from  using  diplomatic assurances in security and asylum cases as a guarantee against torture of returnees to countries where such a risk is present.175





1 The stakeholders listed below have contributed information for this summary; the full texts of all original submissions are available at:  www.ohchr.org.


Civil society

Individual submissions:


CoS Church of Sweden, Uppsala, Sweden;

EAJCW The European Association of Jehovah’s Christian Witnesses, Kraainem, Belgium;

ECLJ European Centre for Law and Justice, Strasbourg, France;

ECPAT-Sweden ECPAT-Sweden (End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking of Children for Sexual Purposes), Stockholm, Sweden;

OIEC Office International de l’Enseignement Catholique/Catholic International Education Office/Office, New York, United States ofAmerica;

Plan-International Plan International, Stockholm, Sweden; PIPrivacy International, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;

RFSL The Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights, Stockholm, Sweden;

Sametinget Sametinget/Sami Parliament of Sweden, Kiruna, Sweden;

SWL Swedish Women’s Lobby, Stockholm, Sweden;

UNICEF-Sweden UNICEF Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden;

WILPF Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, Geneva, Switzerland.


Joint submissions:


JS1 Joint submission 1 submitted by: Uniting Church in Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden and the Baptist World Alliance;


JS2 Joint submission 2 submitted by: Church of Sweden, The Sweden Finnish Delegation, Swedish Finn Youth Organization, National Association of Swedish Tornedalians, Tornedalian Youth Organization, Sami Youth Organization, and The Swedish Federation for Yiddish, Sweden;


UNA-Sweden/JS3 Joint submission 3 submitted by: United Nations Association Sweden and supported by 32 Swedish organizations working in the field of human rights CONTRIBUTORS: Save the Children Sweden • Civil Rights Defenders • The Swedish NGO Foundation for Human Rights • UN Women National Committee Sweden • The Swedish CEDAW-Network • Swedish Association for Sexuality Education (RFSU) • Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Rights (RFSL) • The Swedish Disability Federation (HSO)* • Equally Unique • My Right • The Swedish National Association for Persons with Intellectual Disability (FUB) • DHR • The Guides and Scouts of Sweden • IOGT NTO Sweden • Justitia et Pax • Fredrika Bremer Association • Lions Club International Sweden • Young Falcon Movement • Order of the Teaspoon • Center Against Racism (CMR)* • Swedish Muslims for Peace and Justice • The Assyrian Federation of Sweden • The National Association of Finns in Sweden • International Roma • Women’s Network (IRWN) • Central Roma Delegation • Roma Institute • Roma Youth Delegation • National Roma Association • Sáminourra Swedish Saami Youth Organization • Swedish Saami Association (SSR)* • Young Minority*; *UNA Sweden represents 95 national organizations, *HSO represents 38 disability organizations, *CMR represents 84 organizations working against racism, *SSR represents 43 Saami villages and 22 Saami associations, *Young Minority represents the youth sections of Sweden's five national minorities.


JS4 Joint submission 4 submitted by: Civil Rights Defenders, Sweden, Supported by: Expo Foundation, Sweden, É Romani Glinda, Sweden, Young Roma, Sweden, Network Stop Rönnbäck Nickel Mining Project in Ume River, Tärnaby, Sweden;


JS5 Joint Submission 5 submitted by the Afro-Swedish National Association together with the Eritrean Students’ Association, Stockholm, Sweden;


JS6 Joint Submission 6 submitted by: Entidades Brasileiras y LATAM (ENTBR) on behalf of Organizaciones Sociales: Articulação de Empregados Rurais do estado de MG (ADERE-MG), Asamblea Nacional de Afectados Ambientales – México, Associação de Rádios Públicas do Brasil (ARPUB), Carlo Frabetti (Escritor e Matemático, Miembro de la New York Academy ok Sciences), Comissão Pastoral da Terra (CPT), Confederación de Trabajadores de la Economia Popular – Argentina, Consulta Popular – Brasil, Executiva Nacional dos Estudantes de Biologia (ENEBIO), Federação dos Estudantes de Agronomia do Brasil (FEAB), Fora do Eixo, Fórum Nacional pela Democratização da Comunicação (FNDC), Frente Popular Darío Santillán (FPDS - Argentina), Fundación Pueblo Índio del Ecuador, Grupo Tortura Nunca Mais – Rio de Janeiro, Intersindical Central da Classe Trabalhadora, Jóvenes ante la Emergencia Nacional – México, Coletivo Juntos! - Por outro futuro, Levante Popular da Juventude, Marcha Mundial das Mulheres (MMM), Movimento dos Atingidos por Barragens (MAB), Movimento Nacional de Rádios Comunitárias (MNRC), Movimento de Mulheres Camponesas (MMC), Movimento dos Pequenos Agricultores (MPA), Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra (MST), Movimiento de Liberación Nacional – México, Movimiento de Trabajadores Excluídos – Argentina, Organización de Solidaridad de los Pueblos de África, Asia y América Latina (OSPAAAL), Pastoral da Juventude Rural (PJR), Red Nacional Communia, Rede Ecumênica da Juventude (REJU), União Nacional dos Estudantes (UNE), União da Juventude Socialista (UJS), União da Juventude Rebelião (UJR), Sindicato Unificado dos Petroleiros de São Paulo, Personalidades: Abílio Tozini (Federação Única dos Petroleiros), Adhiero Claudio Katz (Profº Economista UBA), Alba Arias Buenaño (Presidenta de la ACPIBV), Aldo Casas (Antropólogo, revista Herramienta - Argentina), Aldrin Martin Perez Marin (Pesquisador), Altino Bonfim (Profº Universitário Salvador/BA), Ana Laura dos Reis Corrêa (Profª Universitária UnB), Antonio Cechin (Militante Político Marista, fundador da CPT), Arlete Moysés Rodrigues (Profª Livre Docente UNICAMP), Ayrton Centeno (Jornalista), Artur Machado Scavone (Militante Político), Aurélio Fernandes (Profº Universitário UERJ), Caio Boucinhas (Profº Arquitetura USP),Carlos Eduardo Ribeiro (Sindicato dos Papeleiros de Salto- SP), Cecilia Maria Bouças Coimbra (Psicóloga, Historiadora e Profª Universitária), Celi Taffarel (Profª Drª Titular FACED-UFBA), Clarisse Raymundo Braga (Koinonia), Cleide Diamantino Lopes (Marcha Mundial das Mulheres), Daniel Vanden Heede (Bélgica), Dermeval Saviani (Filósofo e Pedagogo Brasileiro), Eliana Rolemberg (CLAI Brasil – Conselho Latino Americano de Igrejas do Brasil), Ermiria Maricato (Arquiteta e Urbanista), Fernando Morais (Escritor Brasileiro), Fernando Vicente Prieto (Periodista argentino residente en Venezuela), Flávia Valéria Pereira Quirino (Instituto de Pesquisa, Direito e Movimentos Sociais), François Houtart (Fundación Pueblo Índio del Ecuador), Frei Betto (Escritor Brasileiro), Geraldo Moreira Prado (Pesquisador), Gigi Malabarba (Fabrica Recuperada em Autogestion, Milan-Itália), Hamilton Octavio de Souza (Jornalista e Professor PUC-SP), Idilio Méndez Grimaldi (Periodista, escritor y analista – Paraguay), Isabel Terán E. (Red Alternativa Bolivariana del Ecuador), Israel Morales Benito (Economista, Especialista en Cooperación para el Desarrollo y Movimientos Sociales), Izabel Loureiro (Profª Aposentada UNESP), Jacinta Gomes da Silva Braga (Prof Educação Básica – MG), Jaqueline Vilas Boas Talga - Antropóloga, discente UNESP-Araraquara, Jarbas Vieira da Silva (Movimento Nacional pela Soberania Popular Frente à Mineração – MAM), João Marcio Mendes Pereira (Prof Adjunto UFRRJ), Jorge Almeida (Prof Universitário UFBA), Jose Ariza R. (Secretario Nacional de la Red Ciudadana PACHA Ecuador), José Jonas Duarte da Costa (Prof Universitário UFPB), Juan Grabois (Advogado Argentino), Luis Felipe Ulloa (Pesquisador), Luis Supliguicha Cárdenas (Actor y comunicador social), Luiz Alberto de Vianna Moniz Bandeira (Prof Univesitário), Luiz Carlos Gabas (Reverendo Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil),Luiz Fernando Resende (Grupo Calango de Teatro), Marcela Kurlat (Red de Solidaridad con Chiapas de Buenos Aires), Marcelo Braz – (Prof e vice-diretor ESS/UFRJ), Marcia Miranda (Militante de Direitos Humanos), Marcos Del Roio (Prof Ciências Políticas UNESP), Maria Luiza Franco Busse (Jornalista), Marta Harnecker (Escritora Chilena), Mariana de Jesús Ramírez R. (C.R.C. "NELA MARTÍNEZ" – Ecuador), Mauricio Vieira Martins (Profº UFF – Universidade Federal Fluminense), Mary Garcia Castro - (Pesquisadora), Michael Lebowitz (Economista Canadense), Michelly Ferreira Monteiro Elias (Profª Universitária UFVJM), Monica Gomez (Estados Unidos), Natalia Viana (Jornalista), Nelson Magalhães da Costa Filho (militante do PCB – Partido Comunista Brasileiro), Nilton Vianna (Editor Chefe do Jornal Brasil de Fato), Nora Ciapponi (Militante Socialista en el FPDS-CN), Osmar do Amaral Barbosa (Ator – Osmar Prado), Paulo Fabrício Rodrigues (Pastoral Fé e Política), Paulo Vinicius Santos Sulli Luduvice (Instituto de Pesquisa, Direito e Movimentos Sociais), Pedro Munhoz (Cantor e Violeiro), Rafael Litvin Villas Bôas (Profº Universitário UNB), Renata Rauta Petarly (Marcha Mundial das Mulheres), Red Alternativa Bolivariana em Ecuador, Ricardo Alemão Abreu (Secretário de Relações Internacionais do PCdoB), Silvia Elizabeth Contreras Morales (Socióloga e Economista BG-MG), Valério Arcary (Dirigente do PSTU), Virgínia Fontes (Profª UERJ e Fiocruz), Wagner Giron de la Torre (Defensor Público), Walnice Nogueira Galvão (Profª Emérita FFLCH-USP), Wellington Santos (Conselho de Juventude de Sorocaba);


JS7 Joint submission 7 of the International Coalition of 16 Human Rights, Fair Trial, and Jurist Organizations for the UPR of Sweden, Reykjavik, Iceland, submitted by: American Association of Jurists (AAJ), Argentina, Arab Lawyers Union (ALU), Association des Avocats Africains Antillais et Autres de France (5AF), France, Association Droit Solidarite, France, Bangladesh Democratic Lawyers Association, Bangladesh, CAGE, United Kingdom, CHARTA 2008, Sweden, European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH), Eva Joly Institute for Justice & Democracy (EJI), Iceland, Giuristi Democratici, Italy (Italian Democratic Lawyers Association), International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), Indian Association of Lawyers, India, Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais sem Terra (MST), Brazil, National Lawyers Guild (NLG), United States of America, National Union of People's Lawyers of the Philippines, the Philippines, and Rättssäkerhetsorganisationen, Sweden;


JS8 Joint Submission 8 submitted by: Fundación Internacional Baltasar Garzón, Madrid, Spain, supported and subscribed to by The Center for Justice & Accountability, San Francisco, United States of America, Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de España, Madrid, Spain, Comité de Apoyo al Tíbet, Spain, Asociación Latinoamericana de Derecho Penal y Criminología, Instituto Mexicano de Derechos Humanos y Democracia A.C., Colectivo de Abogados "José Alvear Restrepo" de Colombia, Vortex y Unión de Juristas Independientes de Andalucía;


National Human Rights Institutions 


OC-Sweden The Ombudsman for Children in Sweden


Regional organizations


CoE Council of Europe, submission for the UPR of Sweden (8 pages) Attachments:


(CoE-CPT) Council of Europe-Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Report to the Swedish Government on the visit to Sweden carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 9 to 18 June 2009 (CPT/Inf (2009) 34);

Response of the Swedish Government to the report of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) on its visit to Sweden from 9 to 18 June 2009 (CPT/Inf (2010) 18);

(CoE-ECRI) Council of Europe-European Commission against Racism and Intolerance ECRI REPORT ON SWEDEN, (fourth monitoring cycle), adopted on 19 June 2012, published on 25 September 2012 (CRI(2012)46);

(CoE-GRETA) Council of Europe-Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings;

Report concerning the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings by Sweden First evaluation round (GRETA(2014)11);

(CoE-ACFC) Council of Europe-Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities;

Third Opinion on Sweden adopted on 23 May 2012 (ACFC/OP/III(2012)004);


EU-FRA European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, submission for the UPR of Sweden (21 pages);


OSCE/ODIHR Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, Warsaw (Poland), submission for the UPR of Sweden (4 pages).


2The following abbreviations have been used in the present document:


ICERD International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

OP-ICESCR Optional Protocol to ICESCR

ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

ICCPR-OP 1 Optional Protocol to ICCPR

CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

OP-CAT Optional Protocol to CAT

CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child

OP-CRC-AC Optional Protocol to CRC on the involvement of children in armed conflict

OP-CRC-SC Optional Protocol to CRC on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography

OP-CRC-IC Optional Protocol to CRC on a communications procedure

CRPD Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.


3 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp.7-8. 4 CoE, submission for the UPR of Sweden, p. 7. 5 OC-Sweden, p.7. See also, Plan-International, para. 8, UNICEF-Sweden, p.2, UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. 6 Sametinget, p.1. See also, JS4, recommendation I, p.12 and JS1, para.10, recommendations 4. 7 CoS, p.2. 8 For the full text of the recommendation see: A/HRC/15/11, para. 95.6 (Plurinational State of Bolivia). 9 UNICEF-Sweden, p.1. 10 ECPAT-Sweden, p.2. See also, OC-Sweden, p.6. 11 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.10 12 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.4. See also, RFSL, p.2 and CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, para. 46. 13 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, para. 95.10 (Djibouti); 95.11 (Russian Federation); 95.12 (India); and 95.13 (Jordan). 14 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.2. 15 Plan-International, para. 9. 16 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp.2-3. 17 CoS, p.1. 18 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.2. 19 JS2, pp.3-5 20 CoS, p.1. 21 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. 22 Plan-International, para. 33. 23 JS5, recommendations, p.5. 24 SWL, p.2. 25 UNA-Sweden, p.6. 26 SWL, p.3. 27 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp.6-7. 28 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.7. 29 CoS, p.2. 30 JS5, para. 5. 31 JS5, recommendations, p.8. 32 JS5, recommendations, p.5. 33 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.6. 34 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.9. 35 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, executive summary, p.8. 36 ECLJ, para. 4. 37 JS5, para. 36. See also, JS5, paras. 37-38. 38 OSCE/ODIHR, submission for the UPR of Sweden, pp. 3-4. 39 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.4. 40 EU-FRA, submission for the UPR of Sweden, p.3 41 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.5. 42 EU-FRA, submission for the UPR of Sweden, p.4. 43 JS4, pp. 7-8. 44 JS4, p.6. 45 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, executive summary, p.8. 46 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp.4-5. 47 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp.4-5. 48 JS4, p.2. 49 JS4, p.3. 50 CoE-CPT, Report to the Swedish Government on the visit to Sweden carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 9 to 18 June 2009 (CPT/Inf (2009) 34), para. 35. 51 JS6, para. 23. 52 CoE-CPT, Report to the Swedish Government on the visit to Sweden carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 9 to 18 June 2009 (CPT/Inf (2009) 34), para. 38. See also, OC-Sweden, p.5. 53 JS6, para. 41. 54 OC-Sweden, pp.4-5. 55 OC-Sweden, p.5. 56 OC-Sweden, p.4. 57 OC-Sweden, p.6. 58 OC-Sweden, p.2. 59 UNA-Sweden/JS3, executive summary, p.1. 60 WILPF, p.1. 61 SWL, p.4. 62 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. 63 SWL, p.4. 64 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. See also,OIEC, paras.7-8 and 20 and CoS, p.1. 65 SWL, p.4. 66 RFSL, p.3. 67 RFSL, p.4. 68 ECPAT-Sweden, p.3. see also ECPAT-Sweden, pp.2-4. 69 CoE, submission for the UPR of Sweden, p. 6 and CoE-GRETA, Report concerning the implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings by Sweden First evaluation round (GRETA(2014)11), para. 221. 70 CoE, submission for the UPR of Sweden, p.6.  CoE-GRETA report , paras. 134-135. 71 UNICEF-Sweden, p. 4. 72 WILPF, p.3. 73 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, paras. 95.23 (South Africa); 95.24 (United States of America); and 95.25 (Qatar). 74 JS4, p.3. 75 CoE-ECRI, ECRI REPORT ON SWEDEN, executive summary, p.8. 76 JS4, p.4. See also, UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.4. 77 JS4, p.4. 78 JS8, para. 10. 79 JS8, para. 11. 80 JS7, page 1. 81 JS8, para. 12 82 JS8, paras. 8 and 24-26. 83 JS8, para. 18. 84 JS6, para. 32 85 JS6, para. 42. 86 JS8, recommendations, p.9. 87 JS6, recommendations, para. 45. 88 JS8, recommendations, p.9. 89 OC-Sweden, p.6. 90 OC-Sweden, p.5. 91 OC-Sweden, p.6. 92 For the full text of the recommendation see: A/HRC/15/11, para. 95.84 (Netherlands). See also, A/HRC/15/11, para. 96.48 (Russian Federation) and A/HRC/15/11/Add.1, recommendations 96.48, p.9. 93 PI, pp.4-6. See also, JS4, pp.4-6. 94 PI, pp. 6-7. 95 JS4, p.6. 96 EAJCW, executive summary. 97 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.8. 98 ECLJ, para.6. 99 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.9. 100 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.9. 101 CoS, p.2. 102 JS5, recommendations, p.5. See also, CoE-ECRI, report on Sweden, executive summary, p. 9 and para. 69.

103 EU-FRA,  submission for the UPR of Sweden,  p. 10. 104 JS5, paras. 17-24. 105 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp.5-6. 106 CoE, submission for the UPR of Sweden, p. 7. 107 CoS, p. 1. 108 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.2. 109 For the full text of the recommendation see: A/HRC/15/11, para. 95.81 (United States of America). 110 UNICEF-Sweden, p. 5. 111 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. 112 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, executive summary, p.8. 113 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, executive summary, p.9, para. 92 and p.47. 114 CoS, p.1. 115 JS4, recommendation V, p.10. 116 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.7. 117 WILPF, p.4. 118 RFSL, p.1. 119 RFSL, p.2.120 JS2, p. 3. 121 RFSL, p.3. 122 RFSL, pp.4-5. 123 CoS, p. 1. 124 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, executive summary, p.8 and para. 102. 125 OIEC, para. 8, recommendations. See also, CoE-ACFC, recommendations, para 189, p.39. 126 OIEC, para. 20. 127 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, paras. 95.33 (Bolivia); 96.44 (Russian Federation); and 95.47 (Philippines). 128 UNICEF-Sweden, pp.6-7. 129 OIEC, para. 11. 130 OIEC, para. 14. 131 JS2, p.3. 132 JS2, p. 4. 133 CoE-ACFC, Third Opinion on Sweden, para. 189, recommendations, pp.38-39. 134 CoE, submission on the UPR of Sweden, p. 6. 135 UNA-Sweden/JS3, pp. 9-10. 136 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.10. 137 CoE-ACFC, Third Opinion on Sweden, para. 24. 138 JS2, p.4. 139 JS4, p. 12. 140 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, paras. 95.1 (Norway); 95.2 (Norway); 95.3 (Greece), 95.68 (Canada), 95.69 (Islamic Republic of Iran), 95.71 (Austria). 141 Sametinget, p.1. 142 CoE-ACFC, Third Opinion on Sweden, paras. 148-149. 143 JS2, p.2. 144 CoE-ACFC, Third Opinion on Sweden, para. 189, recommendations for immediate action. 145 JS2, p.2. 146 JS1, paras. 7-9. 147 JS1, para. 7. 148 JS1, para. 8. 149 JS1, para. 10, recommendations 2 and 3. 150 Sametinget, p.2. 151 JS4, p.12, recommendation III. 152 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, paras. 95.44 (Russian Federation) and 95.73 (Netherlands). 153 JS4, p.6. See also, JS4, pp.7-10. 154 CoE-ACFC, Third Opinion on Sweden, para. 189, recommendations. 155 JS4, p.10. 156 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, Executive Summary, p.7. 157 UNICEF-Sweden, p.3. 158 UNICEF-Sweden, p.3. 159 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, para. 95.80 (Hungary); 95.78 (Spain); and 96.41 (France). See also, A/HRC/15/11/Add.1, recommendation 96.41. 160 UNICEF-Sweden, p.3. 161 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. 162 UNICEF-Sweden, p.2. 163 UNICEF-Sweden, p.4. 164 CoE-GRETA,  Report, para. 137.  See also, UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.3. 165 JS4, p.9. 166 JS4, p.10. 167 CoE-ECRI, ECRI report on Sweden, Executive Summary, p.9. 168 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.10. 169 For the full text of the recommendations see: A/HRC/15/11, paras. 95.15 (Philippines) and 95.16 (Bangladesh). 170 See also, UNICEF-Sweden, p.7. 171 Plan-International, para. 28. 172 Plan-International, para. 30. 173 Plan-International, para. 32. 174 Plan-International, para. 31. 175 UNA-Sweden/JS3, p.10.

United Nations A/HRC/WG.6/21/SWE/3