2025-11-052025/26:TU4 · p.2TUTransport & infrastructure
The reasoning for the decision on a ban on aviation
The justification for the government's power to decide, in an individual case, on a nationwide ban on air traffic
What's at stake: The decision affects how quickly the authorities can act to restrict air traffic across the whole country during a crisis or security threat, while also concerning how clearly justified and time-limited such a far-reaching intervention in civil aviation is.
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 government's proposal to also be able to decide, in an individual case and under the same conditions that already apply to formal regulations, on temporary restrictions of or a ban on air traffic across the whole country is sufficiently justified and proportionate as presented, or whether the government should return with a more thorough analysis before such a power is introduced.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee considers that the existing arrangement, whereby regulations on temporary restrictions of or bans on air traffic nationwide can be issued under extraordinary circumstances or on grounds of public safety, is well designed. The committee also has no objection to equivalent decisions being made, under the same conditions, in an individual case. The committee shares the government's view that, even though it may be possible during a crisis to quickly produce and decide on regulations, this should not always be required, and expects that the option of deciding in an individual case instead will only be used in very urgent situations.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 1 (V)
The reservation (V) has essentially no objections to the proposals, but highlights that the option of deciding, in an individual case, on a nationwide ban on air traffic is of such a nature that it could have far-reaching consequences. Although the procedure is intended only for exceptional occasions, the reservation calls for a more thorough investigation and justification, including an account of the considerations made and an analysis of the effects, for example on civil preparedness capability, and of how the proposal relates to the principle of proportionality. The need for such a power is not questioned in itself, but the reservation points out that there is no specification of how long such a decision could remain in effect, which could mean that air traffic is halted for several - possibly an unlimited number of - months, with deep effects on society.
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 1 by V.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | No 0/19/0/3 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| S | No | Yes 91/0/0/15 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| MP | No | Yes 15/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| C | No | Yes 19/0/0/5 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| L | No | Yes 14/0/0/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| KD | No | Yes 16/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| M | No | Yes 58/0/0/10 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| SD | Yes | Yes 61/0/0/11 | follows the plan | confidence: low | derived |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects motion 2024/25:3431 by Malin Östh et al. (V).
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motion 2024/25:3431 av Malin Östh m.fl. (V).
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag approved the government's proposal which concerns more effective sanctions in aviation. The new rules also mean that the provisions on criminal liability in the Aviation Act will also cover breaches of provisions in EU regulations concerning aviation. Negligence in air traffic that is not gross may constitute grounds for liability, and the law clarifies when a crime is to be assessed as gross. Persons who, whilst under the influence, perform a task of essential importance for aviation safety outside an aircraft may, according to the decision, to a greater extent than under the current regulations be convicted of flying under the influence. The new rules also mean that the government in an individual case may decide on temporary restrictions on or prohibitions of aviation throughout the country. This applies under special circumstances or when otherwise required by considerations of public safety. The new rules enter into force on 1 January 2026.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants the government to return with a developed analysis and justification for the proposal on aviation bans nationwide. (V) — Reservation 1
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 the constitutional laws shall value democracy and people's freedom and rights and that legal certainty shall be upheld through openness and independent review.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan establishes that the constitutional laws shall value democracy and people's freedom and rights and that legal certainty shall be upheld through openness and independent review. A power to in an individual case prohibit all aviation in the country, without specified time limit, is such an intrusive decision that the plan's demands for careful thought and proportionality speak for more thorough investigation and justification. The counter-proposal's demand therefore aligns with the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att grundlagarna ska värna demokratin och människors fri- och rättigheter och att rättssäkerheten ska upprätthållas genom insyn och oberoende granskning. En befogenhet att i ett enskilt fall förbjuda all luftfart i landet, utan angiven tidsgräns, är ett så ingripande beslut att planens krav på eftertanke och proportionalitet talar för en grundligare utredning och motivering. Motförslagets krav ligger därför i linje med planen.
- constitutional protection for rightsdecisive»Grundlagarna ska värna demokratin och människors fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“The constitutional laws shall value democracy and people's freedom and rights.”
- legal certainty and openness»Rättssäkerheten behöver upprätthållas genom rättshjälp, medborgerlig insyn och oberoende granskning.« (party programme ↗)“Legal certainty needs to be upheld through legal aid, public openness and independent review.”
- thorough preparation»Att utveckla kloka politiska lösningar kräver alltid tid och eftertanke.« (party programme ↗)“Developing wise political solutions always requires time and careful thought.”
The plan does not address the decision on banning aviation.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan does not address the decision on banning aviation. The most closely related commitments are to uphold the principles of the rule of law and protect civil liberties and rights, which supports the counter-proposal's demand for more thorough reasoning, proportionality analysis and a time limit for such an intrusive decision. The plan also wishes to strengthen civil preparedness, whose consequences the counter-proposal wishes to see illuminated. The conclusion is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen behandlar inte beslut om förbud mot luftfart. Närmast liggande åtaganden är att slå vakt om rättsstatens principer och skydda medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter, vilket talar för motförslagets krav på grundligare motivering, proportionalitetsanalys och en tidsgräns för ett så ingripande beslut. Planen vill också stärka den civila beredskapen, vars konsekvenser motförslaget vill se belysta. Slutsatsen är härledd.
- principles of the rule of lawdecisive»Slå vakt om rättsstatens principer.« (party programme ↗)“Uphold the principles of the rule of law.”
- protection for freedoms and rights»Skydd för medborgerliga fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“Protection for civil liberties and rights.”
- strengthened civil preparedness»Arbetet att förstärka det civila försvaret och krisberedskapen måste fortsätta, bland annat genom ökade resurser för att rusta och bygga beredskapslager för sjukvården« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The work to strengthen civil defence and crisis preparedness must continue, among other things through increased resources to equip and build emergency stockpiles for healthcare”
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 demands that all new legislation is carefully reviewed on the basis of legal certainty and fundamental freedoms and rights and that the rule of law is protected.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan demands that all new legislation is carefully reviewed on the basis of legal certainty and fundamental freedoms and rights and that the rule of law is protected. A decision that can stop all aviation throughout the entire country without a stated time limit is such an intrusive power that the counter-proposal's demands for deepened investigation, proportionality analysis and consequence assessment follow from that principle. The plan does not address aviation regulation as such.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att all ny lagstiftning prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande fri- och rättigheter och att rättsstaten värnas. Ett beslut som kan stoppa all luftfart i hela landet utan angiven tidsgräns är en så ingripande befogenhet att motförslagets krav på fördjupad utredning, proportionalitetsanalys och konsekvensbedömning följer av den principen. Planen behandlar inte luftfartsregleringen som sådan.
- thorough legal certainty reviewdecisive»prövas noggrant utifrån rättssäkerhet och grundläggande fri- och rättigheter.« (party programme ↗)“be carefully reviewed on the basis of 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”
- power must be scrutinised critically»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 establishes that the state is the only entity that may exercise coercion and that this power must therefore be subject to control, and that the rule of law and the individual's rights against the state shall be defended.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan establishes that the state is the only entity that may exercise coercion and that this power must therefore be subject to control, and that the rule of law and the individual's rights against the state shall be defended. An authority to in a single case stop all air traffic in the entire country, without a specified time limit, is a far-reaching power that according to the plan's view requires a proportionality test and clear justification. The counter-proposal's demand for more thorough investigation therefore aligns with the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att staten är den enda som får utöva tvång och att den makten därför måste vara föremål för kontroll, och att rättsstaten och individens rättigheter gentemot staten ska försvaras. En befogenhet att i ett enskilt fall stoppa all luftfart i hela landet, utan angiven tidsgräns, är en långtgående maktbefogenhet som enligt planens synsätt kräver proportionalitetsprövning och tydlig motivering. Motförslagets krav på grundligare utredning ligger därför i linje med planen.
- control over the state's exercise of powerdecisive»Staten är den enda enheten i samhället som får utöva tvång och våld.« (party programme ↗)“The state is the only entity in society that may exercise coercion and violence.”
- rule of law and proportionality»Rättsstaten och individens rättigheter gentemot staten måste försvaras. Vi säger därför nej till visitationszoner, kollektiv bestraffning, omvänd bevisbörda, anonyma vittnen, preventiv avlyssning och inskränkningar av religionsfriheten.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The rule of law and the individual's rights against the state must be defended. We therefore say no to stop-and-search zones, collective punishment, reverse burden of proof, anonymous witnesses, preventive wiretapping and restrictions on religious freedom.”
- constitutional rights as protection»Konstitutionella fri-, och rättigheter är i detta sammanhang medborgarnas viktigaste« (party programme ↗)“Constitutional freedoms and rights are in this context the citizen's most important protection”
- civil preparedness capacity»Även det civila försvaret är livsviktigt. Vi måste rusta civilförsvaret och samhällets beredskap inför krig och kris.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Civil defence is also vital. We must arm civil defence and society's preparedness for war and crisis.”
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 states that political power shall be limited and that healthy scepticism against increased public power claims is self-evident, and that coercive measures are only justified when an opposing interest weighs clearly more heavily.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan states that political power shall be limited and that healthy scepticism against increased public power claims is self-evident, and that coercive measures are only justified when an opposing interest weighs clearly more heavily. A decision that can stop all air traffic throughout the country without a stated time limit is such a far-reaching authority. The counter-proposal's requirement for more thorough justification and proportionality analysis therefore follows from the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att den politiska makten ska vara begränsad och att en sund skepsis mot ökade offentliga maktanspråk är självklar, och att ingripande åtgärder bara är berättigade när ett motstående intresse väger uppenbart tyngre. Ett beslut som kan stoppa all luftfart i hela landet utan angiven bortre tidsgräns är en sådan långtgående befogenhet. Motförslagets krav på grundligare motivering och proportionalitetsanalys följer därför av planen.
- scepticism of increased public powerdecisive»sund skepsis mot ökade offentliga maktanspråk« (party programme ↗)“healthy scepticism against increased public power claims”
- proportionality in restrictions»negativt är endast berättigade om ett motstående intresse väger uppenbart tyngre och åtgärden är« (party programme ↗)“negative is only justified if an opposing interest weighs clearly more heavily and the measure is”
- limited political power»Det liberala samhället förutsätter politisk frihet. Den politiska makten ska vara begränsad och« (party programme ↗)“Liberal society presupposes political freedom. Political power shall be limited and”
- strengthened legal security»Rättssäkerheten och skyddet för de medborgerliga fri- och rättigheterna behöver förstärkas.« (party programme ↗)“Legal security and protection of civic freedoms and rights need to be strengthened.”
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 a clear separation of powers, that the constitution protects individual rights and that any measures taken are proportionate to what they are intended to protect.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires a clear separation of powers, that the constitution protects individual rights and that any measures taken are proportionate to what they are intended to protect. An authorization to stop all aviation in an individual case without a specified time limit is such an interventionist instrument that the counter-proposal's requirements for more thorough investigation and proportionality analysis are in line with the plan. The issue is not addressed directly in the documents, so the conclusion is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver en klar maktdelning, att grundlagen skyddar den enskildes rättigheter och att ingripande åtgärder står i proportion till det som ska försvaras. Ett bemyndigande att i ett enskilt fall stoppa all luftfart utan angiven tidsgräns är ett så ingripande maktmedel att motförslagets krav på grundligare utredning och proportionalitetsanalys ligger i linje med planen. Frågan behandlas inte direkt i dokumenten, varför slutsatsen är härledd.
- proportionality of state powerdecisive»Vapeninsatsen måste stå i proportion till det som avses att försvaras« (party programme ↗)“The use of force must be proportionate to what is intended to be protected”
- clear separation of powers»Därför kräver en fungerande demokrati en klar maktdelning mellan den lagstiftande, den verkställande och den dömande makten.« (party programme ↗)“Therefore, a functioning democracy requires a clear separation between the legislative, executive and judicial power.”
- the constitution protects rights»Grundlagen ska säkerställa de rättigheter som alltid ska finnas för den enskilda människan och skydda dessa rättigheter från övergrepp.« (party programme ↗)“The constitution shall ensure the rights that must always exist for the individual and protect these rights from abuse.”
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 lacks commitments on aviation bans, but the party programme establishes that all public exercise of power shall be law-governed and characterized by equal treatment and predictability and that power shall not be exercised arbitrarily.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan lacks commitments on aviation bans, but the party programme establishes that all public exercise of power shall be law-governed and characterized by equal treatment and predictability and that power shall not be exercised arbitrarily. A requirement for more thorough justification and a clarification of how long a nationwide ban may apply follows from that principle. The plan therefore comes closest to the counter-proposal's demand.
Original (Swedish)
Planen saknar åtaganden om luftfartsförbud, men partiprogrammet slår fast att all offentlig maktutövning ska vara lagstyrd och präglas av likabehandling och förutsebarhet och att makt inte får utövas godtyckligt. Ett krav på grundligare motivering och en precisering av hur länge ett landsomfattande förbud får gälla följer av den principen. Planen ligger därför närmast motförslagets krav.
- law-governed exercise of powerdecisive»All offentlig maktutövning ska vara lagstyrd och vägledas av« (party programme ↗)“All public exercise of power shall be law-governed and guided by”
- prohibition on arbitrariness»utövas godtyckligt, eller på ett sätt som diskriminerar.« (party programme ↗)“exercised arbitrarily, or in a way that discriminates.”
- protection of freedoms and rights»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”
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 develop special crisis legislation that allows emergency measures to be implemented quickly by the public authorities and strengthen central crisis management capability.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants to develop special crisis legislation that allows emergency measures to be implemented quickly by the public authorities and strengthen central crisis management capability. The counter-proposal's requirement for further investigation and justification before decision-making authority in individual cases is implemented delays precisely such a quick decision-making procedure. The plan's concern for domestic flights argues for restraint with flight bans but does not support the requirement for more investigation.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill ta fram en särskild krislagstiftning som gör att undantagsåtgärder snabbt kan sättas in av det allmänna och stärka den centrala krisledningsförmågan. Motförslagets krav på ytterligare utredning och motivering innan beslutsrätten i enskilt fall införs fördröjer just en sådan snabb beslutsordning. Planens omsorg om inrikesflyget talar för återhållsamhet med flygförbud men bär inte kravet på mer utredning.
- quick emergency measuresdecisive»Särskild lagstiftning bör tas fram för hur en krisorganisation effektivt ska kunna samordna samhällets insatser vid en kris och hur undantagsåtgärder snabbt ska kunna sättas in av det allmänna.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Special legislation should be developed for how a crisis organisation can efficiently coordinate society's efforts in a crisis and how emergency measures can be quickly implemented by the public authorities.”
- crisis legislation»Ta fram en särskild krislagstiftning« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Develop special crisis legislation.”
- strengthened crisis management»Förbättra den centrala krisledningsförmågan« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Improve central crisis management capability.”
- value domestic flights»Bevara inrikesflyget och Bromma flygplats« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Preserve domestic flights and Bromma airport.”
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2025/26:TU4)
- Committee report full text (HD01TU4)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2024/25:3431 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:171 Effektiva sanktioner inom luftfarten av Malin Östh m.fl. (V)
- Proposition 2024/25:171 — Effektiva sanktioner inom luftfarten
Source: The Swedish Parliament