
AI-generated summary
The article describes the author's personal experience of being denied the right to vote in the 2026 election despite Swedish citizenship, due to the fact that she had never been registered in Sweden. It reports on historical changes in Swedish electoral law regarding the voting rights of Swedes living abroad and compares them with the German model which allows voting rights based on political knowledge and affiliation.
On September 13, the Swedish people go to the polls. Sweden's polling stations will then be filled with Swedish citizens who want to take part in shaping the country's future.
The eager and impatient 18-year-old I was two years ago thought she would be able to vote for the first time in 2026. For two years, I have prepared for my debut in Swedish democracy by actively reading Swedish newspapers and closely following party leader debates. A few months before the election, I was informed that, because I have never been registered in Sweden, I do not have the right to vote in Swedish elections - and in an instant something went wrong.
My situation is far from unique. According to information from the organization Swedes in the World and the Electoral Center on the Swedish Election Authority's website, the number of Swedish citizens living abroad can be estimated at approximately 660,000. More than half of them do not have the right to vote in Sweden.
On the Swedish Electoral Authority's website, an expatriate Swede is defined as someone who is a Swedish citizen and who "has ever been registered in Sweden and has emigrated from Sweden". In other words, Swedish legislation bases the voting rights of Swedes abroad on previous population registration.
I believe that a revision of the current regulations is necessary. Sweden should not let previous population registration be decisive for the right to vote, but give more Swedish citizens the opportunity to participate in Swedish parliamentary elections.
The principle of universal suffrage is a central pillar of a democracy.
In 1967, only Swedes living abroad who had been registered with a church in the country during the past five years were allowed to retain their right to vote. The time limit was extended to seven years in 1976 and abolished completely in 1977, but the requirement to have been registered in a church register in Sweden at some point remained. On these three crucial occasions, the discussion revolved mainly around the question of affiliation. Since 1977, previous church registration – since 1991 population registration – has been a requirement for the right to vote in Swedish elections.
However, this stance raises the question: Should an administrative criterion be allowed to determine who has sufficient connections to Sweden to be allowed to vote? Being born abroad does not in itself mean that you have no connection to Sweden. Such a criterion risks excluding Swedish citizens who, despite never having lived in Sweden, have a strong connection to the country and a great interest in Swedish politics.
A more open approach to the voting rights of Swedes abroad would also strengthen the relationship between Sweden and its citizens abroad. They have left the country for various reasons, but that does not mean they would never want to return. Maintaining their sense of belonging to Sweden should therefore be in the country's interest.
However, there are legitimate reasons for the design of today's legal system: the right to vote should presuppose a sufficient connection to Sweden. Citizens who have never lived in the country can be considered less affected by Swedish politics and less likely to return.
This was also the reasoning when the regulations were drawn up in the 1970s. In the report 1975/76:KU43, it was stated that Swedes abroad who had been registered in Sweden during the last seven years had sufficient connections to Sweden and therefore a legitimate interest in participating in Swedish parliamentary elections.
A strong connection to Sweden is of course an important prerequisite for voting in Swedish elections. Civil registration, on the other hand, is not an accurate measure of such connection. Sweden should therefore learn from the German model, which was reformed in 2013.
The year before that, the country's constitutional court ruled that the requirement of previous residence could conflict with the principle of universal suffrage. The court found that the requirement could exclude citizens with strong political affiliations while at the same time giving the right to vote to people who had only lived in Germany as young people and who lacked such affiliations.
Shortly after this landmark judgment, an opportunity was introduced for German citizens who had never lived in the country to vote. According to the current rules, they have the right to vote, if they can demonstrate that they have sufficient knowledge of German political conditions and that they are affected by them.
What went awry when I realized that I lacked the right to vote in Sweden was a mixture of my sense of belonging to the country I had until then called home and my trust in the Swedish legal system.
The principle of universal suffrage is a central pillar of a democracy. It is in Sweden's interest to protect it - primarily by letting actual connection, rather than previous population registration, determine which Swedish citizens have the right to be involved in shaping the country's future.
More about submitters: How to write submitters and replies
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
An inquiry into the reform of voting rights for Swedes abroad will be appointed within the next two years.
Possible · Within years

Nooshi Dadgostar talade på Frihamnsdagarna i Göteborg och betonade att det har blivit för dyrt att leva, att Vänsterpartiet är en garant för en riktig vänsterregering och att ett samarbete med Socialdemokraterna kräver förtroende. Hon kritiserade Magdalena Anderssons öppenhet för samarbete med Centerpartiet och Kristdemokraterna, samt betonade krav på högre löner för kvinnor och höjda pensioner med 2 000 kronor. Dadgostar kommenterade också kontroverser kring V-kandidaters stöd för terrororganisationer och brevkampanjen för palestinska fångar, samt förklarade partiets inställning till Tidöavtalets lagar och migrationspolitik inför valet.
Efter att Jimmie Åkesson ifrågasatt Ebba Busch tillförlitlighet på grund av hennes uttalanden om samarbete med Socialdemokraterna, möttes Busch och Åkesson och uppgav att de är överens om att arbeta för en Tidöseger. Ulf Kristersson spelade ner konflikten och uttryckte förtroende för Busch, samtidigt som han betonade att hans egen sida är mer enad än oppositionen.

Sommaren 2025 hade 7 000 jägare licens för AR-15-gevär i Sverige. Tidöpartierna föreslog först tvångsinlösen men backade och föreslår nu frivillig inlösning. Hittills har drygt 70 vapen lämnats in. Gevären ska inte skickas till Ukraina enligt justitiedepartementet. SD-toppen Richard Jomshof avgick i protest mot beslutet.

Efter att SD-ledaren Jimmie Åkesson ifrågasatte Ebba Buschs trovärdighet i regeringsfrågan vid sitt sommartal i Sölvesborg, svarade Busch genom att ändra sin valturné och hålla ett tal på samma plats. Hon betonade att hon som vice statsminister inte kan spekulera om exceptionella lägen utan att sprida oro, och förnekade att ett bristande Tidömajoritet skulle vara ett sådant läge. Åkesson fortsatte kritiken på X och frågade om Busch skulle förhandla med Magdalena Andersson vid valförlust.
Efter spekulationer om ett möjligt regeringssamarbete med Socialdemokraterna i exceptionella lägen, möttes Ebba Busch och Jimmie Åkesson för ett samtal i Sölvesborg. Busch betonar att KD inte vill vara ett stödhjul åt S och att de är en del av det blågula laget.

Socialdemokraternas partiledare Magdalena Andersson kritiserar den nya lagen om offentlig säljverksamhet (LOS) under ett besök i Göteborg. S varnar för att lagen kan hota kommunala verksamheter som Liseberg och äldreboenden genom anmälningar till Konkurrensverket.