2025-12-032025/26:KU8 · p.3KUConstitution
The role of the Law Council
The Council on Legislation's role in the government's crisis rule-making
What's at stake: The question concerns what safeguards remain in place when the government, in war or serious peacetime crises, can decide on rules without parliament's prior approval. The decision affects the legal certainty of everyone subject to such rules and how quickly an independent legal review can take place in a crisis.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether the Council on Legislation's review should be specifically strengthened for cases where, under the new crisis framework, the government is given rule-making power without prior authorisation from parliament, or whether the proposed arrangement should stand without such an added review.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee backs the government's proposal on constitutional crisis preparedness in full and rejects the motion for a dedicated inquiry into the Council on Legislation's role. The committee shares the government's view that sound constitutional preparedness, built through ordinary legislative work in advance, offers the best conditions for effective and legally secure rules, and that the proposed arrangement - with parliament's after-the-fact control of the government's crisis rule-making - is sufficient without a separate inquiry into the Council's role.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 2 (V)
The reservation (V) backs the government's proposal in other respects, but wants the Council on Legislation's role specifically strengthened for the exceptional cases where the government can decide on rules without parliament first deciding on a legal authorisation. The reasoning is that such a review - checking that a rule meets the constitution's requirements of proportionality, necessity and acceptability in a democratic society - would raise the quality and legal certainty of precisely these extraordinary legislative cases. The government should therefore set up an inquiry into how the Council's role can be strengthened in these cases.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 2 by V.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
The decision would have held
Explicit commitments that contradicted the vote: SDSverigedemokraterna
Ja 281–19Ja 218–82
Counterfactual: the parties above are moved to the position their own documents explicitly point at, carrying their whole contingent present. Every other party keeps its real figures, including dissenters and absentees.
How the AI parties would have voted
For each party: what its own plan – election manifesto and party programme – argues for in this case, next to how the party actually voted. The AI can only answer Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| AI | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | No 0/19/0/3 | match | confidence: medium | derived |
| S | No | Yes 92/0/0/14 | differs | confidence: medium | derived |
| MP | No | Yes 15/0/0/3 | differs | confidence: high | derived |
| C | No | Yes 21/0/0/3 | differs | confidence: medium | derived |
| L | No | Yes 14/0/0/2 | differs | confidence: medium | derived |
| KD | No | Yes 16/0/0/3 | differs | confidence: medium | derived |
| M | No | Yes 59/0/0/9 | differs | confidence: medium | derived |
| SD | No | Yes 63/0/0/9 | differsagainst own programme | confidence: medium | explicit |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects motion 2025/26:57 by Jessica Wetterling et al. (V) point of order 1.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motion 2025/26:57 av Jessica Wetterling m.fl. (V) yrkande 1.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag and government should be given better conditions to fulfill their tasks and make necessary decisions on a legal basis in war and other severe crises. The Riksdag approved adopting, as pending, the government's proposal to amend the Instrument of Government and the Rules of Procedure of the Riksdag in the parts concerning the main provisions. The government's proposal includes the following, among other things: The Riksdag's ability to convene is strengthened. The Riksdag's war delegation is retained for war and war threat, and the rules regarding the delegation are adjusted. Among other things, the Speaker gets a role corresponding to that in the Riksdag. Furthermore, a member who becomes a minister shall no longer be able to serve in the delegation. New provisions on rule-making in serious peacetime crisis situations are introduced. The regulation means that the Riksdag with qualified majority shall be able to give the government special powers to issue regulations if needed to handle the crisis situation. These powers can be recalled by the Riksdag at any time. Since the proposal concerns constitutional amendments, the Riksdag must vote equally twice on the proposal and a general election must be held between the votes. This is the first decision on the proposal. The Riksdag approved adopting the proposal as pending. The legislative changes are proposed to come into force on 1 January 2027.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants to see an investigation into how the Legal Council's role can be strengthened in cases of government's extraordinary rule-making power. (V) — Reservation 2
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan establishes that basic laws shall protect democracy and people's freedoms and rights, and that legal security is maintained through transparency and independent oversight.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan establishes that basic laws shall protect democracy and people's freedoms and rights, and that legal security is maintained through transparency and independent oversight. To strengthen the Legal Council's role in precisely those exceptional cases where norms can be decided without prior authorization is such independent pre-review of proportionality and necessity. This also responds to the plan's requirement for careful consideration in the formulation of legislation.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att grundlagarna ska värna demokratin och människors fri- och rättigheter och att rättssäkerheten upprätthålls genom insyn och oberoende granskning. Att stärka Lagrådets roll i just de undantagsfall där normer kan beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande är en sådan oberoende förhandsgranskning av proportionalitet och nödvändighet. Det svarar också mot planens krav på eftertanke i utformningen av lagstiftning.
- constitutional protection for rightsdecisive»Grundlagarna ska värna demokratin och människors fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“Basic laws shall protect democracy and people's freedoms and rights.”
- independent oversight»Rättssäkerheten behöver upprätthållas genom rättshjälp, medborgerlig insyn och oberoende granskning.« (party programme ↗)“Legal security needs to be maintained through legal aid, citizen transparency and independent oversight.”
- quality in legislation»Att utveckla kloka politiska lösningar kräver alltid tid och eftertanke.« (party programme ↗)“Developing wise political solutions always requires time and careful consideration.”
The plan upholds the principles of the rule of law and requires protection of civil liberties and rights and that democratic institutions are protected.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan upholds the principles of the rule of law and requires protection of civil liberties and rights and that democratic institutions are protected. Investigating a strengthened role for the Council on Legislation precisely in those exceptional cases when norms can be decided without prior authorization aligns with this, because pre-review of proportionality and necessity raises legal security. The counter-proposal is supported.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår vakt om rättsstatens principer och kräver skydd för medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter samt att de demokratiska institutionerna skyddas. Att utreda en stärkt roll för Lagrådet i just de undantagsfall då normer kan beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande ligger i linje med detta, eftersom förhandsgranskning av proportionalitet och nödvändighet höjer rättssäkerheten. Motförslaget stöds.
- principles of the rule of lawdecisive»Slå vakt om rättsstatens principer.« (party programme ↗)“Uphold the principles of the rule of law.”
- protection of liberties and rights»Skydd för medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“Protection of civil liberties and rights.”
- protected democratic institutions»De demokratiska institutionerna måste skyddas.« (party programme ↗)“Democratic institutions must be protected.”
- equality before the law»En rättsordning som bygger på allas likhet inför lagen.« (party programme ↗)“A legal order based on equality before the law for all.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan requires that all new legislation be carefully reviewed based on legal certainty and fundamental freedoms and rights and that the rule of law be protected and strengthened.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that all new legislation be carefully reviewed based on legal certainty and fundamental freedoms and rights and that the rule of law be protected and strengthened. Norms that are decided without prior authorization in law are precisely the situation where advance review of proportionality and necessity is needed. The counter-proposal's demand for an investigation into a strengthened role for the Legal Council in these exceptional cases therefore follows from the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att all ny lagstiftning prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande fri- och rättigheter och att rättsstaten värnas och stärks. Normer som beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande i lag är just den situation där en förhandsgranskning av proportionalitet och nödvändighet behövs. Motförslagets krav på en utredning om stärkt roll för Lagrådet i dessa undantagsfall följer därför av planen.
- careful legal certainty reviewdecisive»prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“be carefully reviewed based on legal certainty and fundamental freedoms and rights.”
- protection of the rule of law»Miljöpartiet vill värna och stärka rättsstaten« (party programme ↗)“The Green Party wants to protect and strengthen the rule of law”
- protection of the constitution»skydda Sveriges grundlag mot snabba förändringar« (2022 manifesto ↗)“protect Sweden's constitution against rapid changes”
- power shall be critically scrutinized»Överdriven maktkoncentration är odemokratiskt och korrumperar.« (party programme ↗)“Excessive concentration of power is undemocratic and corrupts.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan wants to protect democratic institutions, make the constitution harder to amend, and strengthen judicial independence, and sees a constitutional court as a natural element in a society that values freedom.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants to protect democratic institutions, make the constitution harder to amend, and strengthen judicial independence, and sees a constitutional court as a natural element in a society that values freedom. Strengthening the Lagråd's review of precisely those rules that can be decided without prior authorisation in legislation is an application of this line. Fundamental rights must never be taken for granted according to the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill skydda de demokratiska institutionerna, göra grundlagen svårare att ändra och stärka domstolarnas oberoende, och ser en författningsdomstol som ett naturligt inslag i ett samhälle som värnar friheten. Att stärka Lagrådets granskning av just de normer som kan beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande i lag är en tillämpning av den linjen. Grundläggande rättigheter får enligt planen aldrig tas för givna.
- protection for democratic institutionsdecisive»Våra demokratiska institutioner behöver skydd. Vi vill göra det svårare att ändra grundlagen, skydda oppositionens ställning i riksdagen och stärka domstolarnas oberoende.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Our democratic institutions need protection. We want to make it harder to amend the constitution, protect the opposition's position in the Riksdag, and strengthen judicial independence.”
- legal review of legislation»En författningsdomstol ska vara ett naturligt inslag i ett samhälle som värnar enskilda människors« (party programme ↗)“A constitutional court should be a natural element in a society that values individual”
- rights must not be taken for granted»Våra grundläggande rättigheter får inte tas för givna.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Our fundamental rights must not be taken for granted.”
- separation of powers against centralisation»en maktdelning där politiska beslut och andra maktbefogenheter inte centraliseras« (party programme ↗)“a separation of powers where political decisions and other powers are not centralised”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan explicitly wants to strengthen the legal control of norms that restrict freedoms and rights, all the way to a constitutional court that can overturn such provisions.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan explicitly wants to strengthen the legal control of norms that restrict freedoms and rights, all the way to a constitutional court that can overturn such provisions. An investigation to strengthen the Council of Legislation's scrutiny precisely when rules can be decided without prior authorization is a smaller step in the same direction. The plan's skepticism towards increased claims of public power points in the same direction.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill uttryckligen stärka den rättsliga kontrollen av normer som begränsar fri- och rättigheter, ända till en författningsdomstol som kan häva sådana bestämmelser. En utredning om att stärka Lagrådets granskning just när regler kan beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande är ett mindre steg i samma riktning. Planens skepsis mot ökade offentliga maktanspråk pekar åt samma håll.
- legal control of norm-settingdecisive»Vi vill se ett förstärkt grundlagsskydd för vårt demokratiska statsskick, öka domstolarnas oberoende och verka för en författningsdomstol som ska kunna häva lagar eller bestämmelser som strider mot grundlagsskyddade fri- och rättigheter.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We want to see strengthened constitutional protection for our democratic state system, increase the independence of courts and work for a constitutional court that shall be able to overturn laws or provisions that violate constitutionally protected freedoms and rights.”
- constitutional court»Rättssäkerheten och skyddet för de medborgerliga fri- och rättigheterna behöver förstärkas. Därför ska en författningsdomstol inrättas i Sverige.« (party programme ↗)“Rule of law and protection of civil freedoms and rights need to be strengthened. Therefore, a constitutional court shall be established in Sweden.”
- skepticism towards power claims»I det liberala samhället är vaksamhet på hur den offentliga makten utövas, och en sund skepsis mot ökade offentliga maktanspråk, därför en självklarhet.« (party programme ↗)“In the liberal society vigilance on how public power is exercised, and healthy skepticism towards increased claims of public power, is therefore self-evident.”
- strong constitutional protection»Grundlagsskyddet för demokratin och de individuella fri- och rättigheterna ska vara starkt.« (party programme ↗)“Constitutional protection for democracy and individual freedoms and rights shall be strong.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan requires an effective right of judicial review and effective means against abuse of power and power concentration, with the starting point that too much power must not be placed in a single individual's or party's hands.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires an effective right of judicial review and effective means against abuse of power and power concentration, with the starting point that too much power must not be placed in a single individual's or party's hands. Strengthening the Lagråd's (Legal Council) scrutiny precisely in those exceptional cases where norms can be decided without prior authorization in law is an application of that principle. The counter-proposal's demand for an investigation into this is therefore supported by the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver en effektiv lagprövningsrätt och effektiva medel mot maktmissbruk och maktkoncentration, med utgångspunkt i att för mycket makt inte får läggas i en enskilds eller ett partis händer. Att stärka Lagrådets granskning just i de undantagsfall då normer kan beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande i lag är en tillämpning av den principen. Motförslagets krav på en utredning om detta stöds därför av planen.
- effective judicial reviewdecisive»Det ska finnas en effektiv lagprövningsrätt.« (party programme ↗)“There shall be an effective right of judicial review.”
- means against abuse of power»Det måste finnas effektiva medel mot maktmissbruk och maktkoncentration.« (party programme ↗)“There must be effective means against abuse of power and power concentration.”
- power must not be concentrated»Människans ofullkomlighet innebär att för mycket makt inte får läggas i en enskild« (party programme ↗)“Human imperfection means that too much power must not be placed in a single”
- review against the constitution»En viktig uppgift för domstolen ska vara att pröva om lagar och andra« (party programme ↗)“An important task for the court shall be to review whether laws and other”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan promises to strengthen the independence of the courts and the protection of citizens' freedoms and rights, and requires that the constitution provide practical and effective protection, not just fine words.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan promises to strengthen the independence of the courts and the protection of citizens' freedoms and rights, and requires that the constitution provide practical and effective protection, not just fine words. Enhanced scrutiny of precisely that emergency legislation which can be decided without prior authorization is in line with this, and with the requirement for true separation of powers. Investigating how the Council on Legislation's role can be strengthened thus follows the plan's commitment.
Original (Swedish)
Planen lovar att stärka domstolarnas oberoende och skyddet för medborgarnas fri- och rättigheter och kräver att grundlagen ger ett praktiskt och effektivt skydd, inte bara vackra ord. En förstärkt granskning av just den krisnormgivning som kan beslutas utan föregående bemyndigande ligger i linje med detta och med kravet på verklig maktdelning. Att utreda hur Lagrådets roll kan stärkas följer därmed planens åtagande.
- strengthened judicial independencedecisive»Stärka domstolarnas oberoende och skyddet för medborgarnas fri- och rättigheter« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Strengthen the independence of the courts and the protection of citizens' freedoms and rights”
- effective constitutional protection»Vi måste se till att det inte bara är vackra ord, utan att grundlagen också ger ett praktiskt och effektivt skydd för enskilda människor i relation till exempelvis en kommun eller en statlig myndighet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We must ensure that it is not just fine words, but that the constitution also provides practical and effective protection for individuals in relation to, for example, a municipality or a government agency.”
- true separation of powers»Vår demokrati bygger på vår förmåga att slå vakt om grundlagarna, medborgarnas fri- och rättigheter, verklig maktdelning och våra domstolars oberoende.« (party programme ↗)“Our democracy rests on our ability to safeguard the constitution, citizens' freedoms and rights, true separation of powers, and the independence of our courts.”
- accountability for public decisions»Vi ser stora behov av att förstärka domstolarnas oberoende och förtydliga hur ansvar kan utkrävas för offentliga beslut.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We see a great need to strengthen the independence of the courts and clarify how accountability can be demanded for public decisions.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan explicitly wishes to strengthen the Lagråd's position and investigate how this can be done, and increase elements of separation of powers and norm review in the Constitution.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan explicitly wishes to strengthen the Lagråd's position and investigate how this can be done, and increase elements of separation of powers and norm review in the Constitution. The counter-proposal's demands for an investigation into how the Lagråd's role can be strengthened in crisis rule-making without prior authorization is the same commitment applied to exceptional cases. The plan's rule-of-law line speaks for a preliminary review of proportionality and necessity.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill uttryckligen stärka Lagrådets ställning och utreda hur detta kan ske, samt öka inslagen av maktdelning och normprövning i grundlagen. Motförslagets krav på en utredning om hur Lagrådets roll kan stärkas vid krisnormgivning utan föregående bemyndigande är samma åtagande tillämpat på undantagsfallen. Planens rättsstatliga linje talar för en förhandsgranskning av proportionalitet och nödvändighet.
- strengthened Lagråd positiondecisive»Lagrådets ställning bör stärkas genom att utreda möjligheten att fordra kvalificerad majoritet i riksdagen vid antaganden av lagförslag om vilka Lagrådet riktat kritik.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The Lagråd's position should be strengthened by investigating the possibility of requiring a qualified majority in the Riksdag when adopting legislative proposals on which the Lagråd has directed criticism.”
- expanded norm review»Öka möjligheten till normprövning i grundlagen« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Increase the possibility of norm review in the Constitution”
- separation of powers and rule of law»Sverigedemokraterna vill stärka de rättsstatliga principerna i den svenska förvaltningsmodellen genom ökade inslag av maktdelning och ett stärkt oberoende av domstolsväsendet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Sweden Democrats wish to strengthen the rule-of-law principles in the Swedish administrative model through increased elements of separation of powers and a strengthened independence of the judiciary.”
- stronger rights protection»Förstärka grundlagens rättighetsskydd vad gäller yttrandefrihet, äganderätt och frihet från religion« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Strengthen the Constitution's protection of rights regarding freedom of expression, property rights and freedom from religion”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2025/26:KU8)
- Committee report full text (HD01KU8)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2025/26:57 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:155 Stärkt konstitutionell beredskap av Jessica Wetterling m.fl. (V)
- Motion 2025/26:78 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:155 Stärkt konstitutionell beredskap av Jan Riise m.fl. (MP)
- Proposition 2024/25:155 — Stärkt konstitutionell beredskap
Source: The Swedish Parliament