Statement: Sweden Must Reject the Expansion of Sex Work Criminalisation: Protect Rights, Not Repression

Statement: Sweden Must Reject the Expansion of Sex Work Criminalisation: Protect Rights, Not Repression

TAKE ACTION AND CLICK HERE TO SIGN OUR STATEMENT AS AN ORGANISATION OR INDIVIDUAL SUPPORTER



 

 

You can download our statement in English and Swedish.

 

Swedish version below / Svensk version nedan

We, the undersigned civil society organisations and individuals, strongly oppose the Swedish government’s proposal (prop. 2024/25:124 - Chapter 6, p. 28-38) to expand the criminalisation of sex work to include the purchase of sexual acts performed remotely, such as webcamming and erotic modelling. This proposal represents a regressive and dangerous step that threatens the human rights, privacy, safety and livelihoods of sex workers and digital creators in Sweden and beyond.

Under the guise of protecting vulnerable individuals, this proposal risks intensifying state surveillance, expanding unaccountable policing of digital platforms, and reinforcing a legal regime that systematically erases the consent, autonomy and voices of sex workers themselves.

While the government frames this proposal as a necessary step to protect individuals from exploitation in the digital age, its actual impact will be deeply harmful. Rather than offering meaningful protection, the expanded criminalisation of sexual acts, especially those performed remotely, will further marginalise the very people it claims to defend. To understand the real consequences of this bill, we must look beyond its stated intentions and examine how it will function in practice. As it stands, we see many harmful impacts that are guaranteed by this proposal.

  1. It criminalises consensual digital labour. 

    Digital sex work, such as webcamming or erotic content creation and distribution, is a legitimate source of income and form of self-expression. For many, it is a form of work that offers greater control over boundaries, scheduling and visibility. Criminalising remote sexual services will eliminate a vital option for those seeking to work independently and securely. During the COVID-19 pandemic, digital platforms became a lifeline for sex workers who lost in-person income overnight. Many turned to camming, subscription platforms, and other forms of online sex work to survive. This shift was not only adaptive, it was protective. Taking this option away will undermine harm reduction and increase economic vulnerability.

  2. It expands and exacerbates the harms of client criminalisation.

    Sweden’s model of criminalising clients has been repeatedly shown, by global research, to harm sex workers, not help them. Studies by Amnesty International, UNAIDS, and academic research across Europe have documented that client criminalisation increases stigma, pushes sex work underground, reduces safety and limits access to justice for sex workers facing violence. Adding remote sexual services to the scope of criminalisation will only worsen these effects. It will make clients more fearful, more secretive, and less willing to communicate or engage with safety protocols. It will further isolate sex workers, particularly migrants and trans people, who already face disproportionate marginalisation and barriers to support.

  3. The proposal relies on vague, unenforceable legal standards.

    The proposed language hinges on ambiguous terms like “induce” and “primary purpose,” which legal experts and courts have warned will lead to confusion, overreach and the potential criminalisation of consensual adult relationships, especially those involving financial inequality or emotional complexity.

  4. The proposal expands surveillance and undermines digital rights.

    The enforcement of this law will rely on invasive monitoring of online communication, platform activity, and financial transactions. This will expose not only sex workers and creators to intensified data surveillance and breaches of privacy, disproportionately affecting women, LGBTQI+ people and migrants.

    For sex workers, privacy and data protection are not luxuries; they are essential to safety, autonomy and dignity. The ability to control how one is identified, tracked, and exposed online is a matter of survival for many sex workers, especially those facing criminalisation, migration precarity, or stigma. Privacy is a human right, enshrined in international law, and sex workers, like all people, are entitled to live free from invasive state surveillance and policing of their digital lives.

    Sex workers have long been the canaries in the digital coal mine. When their rights are eroded, through censorship, criminalisation, or surveillance, those same tools and tactics are often later used against other communities: journalists, LGBTQI+ people, youth, and political dissidents. The criminalisation of digital sex work sets a dangerous precedent that puts everyone’s human rights at risk.


  5. The proposal endangers online communities and platforms.

    Websites and platforms hosting or facilitating consensual digital sex work could be prosecuted for “digital pimping” creating a chilling effect that may lead to mass deplatforming of sex workers, mirroring the harms documented under regressive FOSTA/SESTA law in the United States that was enacted by the Trump Government in 2018. The result of this proposal will be the same: increased precarity due to sex workers losing their income, not protection.

  6. The proposal undermines legal clarity and constitutional protections.

    The proposal introduces inconsistencies with Sweden’s own Freedom of Expression Act. In doing so, it threatens to erode constitutional safeguards and opens the door to selective enforcement and censorship, which puts everyone in Sweden in danger. Sweden’s constitutional protection of free speech and media is a cornerstone of its democratic identity. Expanding criminal law into this space, without careful legal distinction, proportionality and protection for lawful expression, undermines that foundation. If sex workers and digital creators can be criminalised for engaging in or facilitating constitutionally protected expression, no one’s rights are safe in Sweden.


Based on our concerns, we ask the Swedish Government to:

  • Withdraw this proposal in its current form.
  • Consult directly with sex workers and digital rights experts before drafting any further reforms.
  • Protect the digital safety and economic rights of workers across platforms.
  • Invest in services, not criminalisation: Provide financial support, adequate housing, healthcare and rights-based outreach.

Sweden once positioned itself as a global leader on gender equality and social justice. But equality without consent is coercion, protection without listening is paternalism, and a society that claims to care for the most vulnerable must not criminalise their means of income generation and deny their agency.

We call on the Swedish government and Parliament to reject this misguided proposal in its entirety and commit instead to a model of policy-making that is inclusive, evidence-based and grounded in human rights.

Sex work is not a crime. Digital labour is not a threat. Sex workers’ safety and human rights are not up for debate.

Respectfully,

Written by:
European Sex Workers’ Rights Alliance (ESWA) - www.eswalliance.org
Red Umbrella Sweden (RUS) -
https://redumbrella.se/sv/hem/

 

To see the list of signatories and supporters, please scroll to the end of the page.

 


Sverige måste säga nej till en utökad kriminalisering av sexarbete – skydda rättigheter, inte förtryck

Vi, undertecknade civilsamhällesorganisationer och individer, motsätter oss starkt regeringens förslag (prop. 2024/25:124  - Avsnitt 6, s. 28-38) om att utöka kriminaliseringen av sexköp till att även omfatta distansbaserade sexuella tjänster, såsom web-camming och skräddarsydda erotiska videos. Förslaget är ett bakåtsträvande och riskabelt steg som hotar mänskliga rättigheter, personlig integritet, säkerhet och försörjningsmöjligheter – både för sexarbetare och digitala kreatörer, i Sverige och internationellt.

Under skenet av att skydda utsatta grupper riskerar lagförslaget i praktiken att intensifiera statlig övervakning, främja oansvarigt polisarbete på digitala plattformar och förstärka ett rättssystem som systematiskt ignorerar sexarbetares samtycke, autonomi och röster.

Regeringen framställer detta som ett nödvändigt skydd från exploatering i den digitala tidsåldern. I verkligheten är konsekvenserna skadliga. Istället för att erbjuda verkligt skydd riskerar kriminaliseringen av digitalt sexarbete på nätet att ytterligare marginalisera de människor som lagen säger sig vilja försvara. För att förstå vad detta förslag verkligen innebär måste vi se bortom dess formella syften – och granska hur det kommer att fungera i praktiken.

Vi ser redan nu en rad allvarliga konsekvenser:

  1. Det kriminaliserar samtyckesbaserat digitalt arbete

    Digitalt sexarbete – som webcamming eller skapandet av erotiskt innehåll – är en legitim inkomstkälla och en form av självuttryck. För många innebär det större kontroll över arbetsmiljö, gränssättning och synlighet. Att kriminalisera dessa tjänster berövar människor möjligheten att arbeta självständigt och säkert. Under covid-19 pandemin blev digitala plattformar en livlina för sexarbetare som förlorade sina inkomster över en natt. Många övergick till camming, prenumerationsbaserade tjänster och andra digitala format – inte bara för försörjning, utan också för ökad säkerhet. Att ta bort detta alternativ underminerar skademinimering och förvärrar den ekonomiska utsattheten.

  2. Det förvärrar skadorna av nuvarande sexköpslagstiftning

    Den svenska modellen, som kriminaliserar sexköp men inte själva sexarbetet, har i upprepade internationella studier visat sig skada sexarbetare snarare än hjälpa dem. Amnesty International, UNAIDS och europeisk forskning pekar på att kriminalisering leder till ökad stigmatisering, sexarbete verkar i det dolda med minskad trygghet och svårare tillgång till rättsskydd för våldsutsatta. Att nu även inkludera digitala tjänster kommer ytterligare att förvärra situationen. Kunder blir räddare, mer hemlighetsfulla och mindre benägna att kommunicera – vilket ökar risken för sexarbetare. Det isolerar marginaliserade grupper ytterligare – särskilt migranter och transpersoner, som ofta utsätts för dubbel diskriminering.

  3. Det bygger på vaga och svårtolkade juridiska begrepp

    Förslagets formuleringar är otydliga, med begrepp som "framkalla" och "primärt syfte", vilket rättsexperter varnat för kan leda till godtyckliga tolkningar. Det riskerar att kriminalisera vuxna samtyckande relationer, särskilt när ekonomiska klyftor eller komplicerade känslomässiga relationer är inblandade – utan att det nödvändigtvis innebär ett utnyttjande.

  4. Det ökar övervakning och hotar digitala rättigheter

    För att kunna tillämpa lagen krävs övervakning av digital kommunikation, plattformsaktivitet och ekonomiska transaktioner. Det innebär ett allvarligt intrång i integriteten för sexarbetare och andra kreatörer – särskilt kvinnor, HBTQ+-personer och migranter.

    För dessa grupper är integritet inte en lyx, utan en nödvändighet. Att själv kunna kontrollera sin identitet online är avgörande för säkerhet, självständighet och värdighet. Integritet är en mänsklig rättighet inskrivet i internationell rätt – och sexarbetare har samma rätt att leva utan övervakning som alla andra.

    Sexarbetare har länge fungerat som kanariefåglar i den digitala kolgruvan. När sexarbetares rättigheter urholkas följer det andra efter: journalister, aktivister, ungdomar och politiska motståndare. Kriminalisering av digitalt sexarbete öppnar för farliga prejudikat för alla.

  5. Det hotar hela digitala plattformar och communities

    Plattformar som möjliggör samtyckesbaserat digitalt sexarbete riskerar att åtalas för "digital hallickverksamhet". Det skapar en skrämseleffekt där sexarbetare riskerar att raderas från nätet – likt konsekvenserna av den amerikanska FOSTA/SESTA-lagen 2018, som implementerades under Trump-administrationen. Resultatet blev inte skydd – utan utsatthet, förlust av inkomster och ökad sårbarhet. Detsamma kommer ske här.

  6. Det undergräver rättssäkerhet och strider mot grundlagen

    Förslaget står i konflikt med svensk grundlag – särskilt yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen. Det öppnar för godtycke, censur och selektiv tillämpning, vilket äventyrar allas rättigheter i Sverige. Att kriminalisera uttryck som skyddas av grundlagen riskerar att urholka vår demokratiska kärna. Om sexarbetare kan straffas för grundlagsskyddade uttryck, är ingen längre skyddad.


Vi uppmanar regeringen att:

  • Dra tillbaka förslaget i sin nuvarande form
  • Konsultera sexarbetare och experter på digitala rättigheter i vidare lagstiftning
  • Skydda digital säkerhet och ekonomiska rättigheter för sexarbetare
  • Satsa på stödinsatser – inte kriminalisering: tillgång till bostad, vård och rättighetsbaserat stöd

Sverige har en gång varit en förebild för jämställdhet och rättvisa. Men jämlikhet utan samtycke är tvång. Skydd utan dialog är förmynderi. Ett samhälle som vill värna om de mest utsatta kan inte samtidigt kriminalisera deras försörjning och förneka deras rätt att fatta beslut över sina egna liv.

Vi uppmanar regeringen och riksdagen att avvisa detta förslag i sin helhet och i stället arbeta för en inkluderande, kunskapsbaserad och rättighetsfokuserad politik.

Sexarbete är inte ett brott. Digitalt arbete är inte ett hot. Sexarbetares säkerhet och rättigheter är inte förhandlingsbara.

Med respektfulla hälsningar,


Skrivet av:

European Sex Workers’ Rights Alliance (ESWA) - www.eswalliance.org
Red Umbrella Sweden (RUS) - https://redumbrella.se/sv/hem/



Signatories: 

Organisations:

  1. Abolition Feminism for Ending Sexual Violence Collective, United Kingdom
  2. Access Now, Brussels, Belgium 
  3. Adhara Asociación VIH/sida, Spain
  4. Africa Advocacy Foundation, United Kingdom
  5. AIDS Action Europe, Europe
  6. Apoyo Positivo, Spain
  7. APROSEX, Spain
  8. Aspiration, Europe
  9. Asociación Civil TS Rosas Mujeres de Lucha Perú, Perú
  10. Association for Support of Marginalized Workers STAR-STAR Skopje, North Macedonia
  11. BC Coalition of Experiential Communities (BCCEC), Canada
  12. BCN Checkpoint, Spain
  13. Borealis Atelier, Sweden
  14. Bristol Sex Workers Collective, United Kingdom
  15. CATS, Spain
  16. Checkpoint Plus Roma, Italy
  17. Club Hävytön, Finland
  18. Coalición Laboral Puteril (CLaP!), Mexico
  19. Colectivo de Prostitutas de Sevilla, Spain
  20. Colectivo FULGOR, Spain
  21. CO “LEGALIFE-UKRAINE”, Ukraine
  22. Comitato per i Diritti Civili delle Prostitute, Italy
  23. Correlation-European Harm Reduction Network, The Netherlands
  24. Count Me In! (Consortium of: AWID, CREA, JASS, Mama Cash, Urgent Action Fund for Feminist Activism and Urgent Action Fund-Africa, and strategic partners, Red Umbrella Fund (RUF) and WO=MEN)
  25. Danes je nov dan, Inštitut za druga vprašanja, Slovenia
  26. Decrim Now, United Kingdom
  27. Dekrim Kolektiv, Czech Republic
  28. DiverCity, Republic of Armenia
  29. Dublin LGBTQ Pride, Ireland
  30. Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice, Europe
  31. ESPACE P, Belgium
  32. European AIDS Treatment Group, Belgium
  33. European Digital Rights (EDRi), Europe
  34. European Network Against Racism (ENAR), Europe
  35. European Network for the Promotion of Rights and Health Among Migrant Sex Workers, Europe
  36. Fair Trade Sex Work (FTS), Finland
  37. Fiz Fachstelle Frauenhandel und Frauenmigration, Switzerland
  38. Fondazione LILA Milano, Italy
  39. Foundation Queer.red, the Netherlands
  40. Gat Grupo de Ativistas em Tratamentos, Portugal
  41. Gen!us, Sweden
  42. Glitch, United Kingdom
  43. Global Network of Sex Work Projects (NSWP), Global
  44. Griselidis, France
  45. GSPF, Gesellschaft für Sexarbeits- und Prostitutionsforschung, Düsseldorf, Germany
  46. HPLGBT, Ukraine
  47. Human Rights Watch (HRW), Global
  48. Hydra e.V., Germany
  49. iBUS Innsbrucker Beratung und Unterstützung für Sexarbeiter*innen, Austria
  50. Intersex Ireland, Ireland
  51. Kamelia Collective, Poland
  52. KASSANDRA e.V., Germany
  53. La Strada International, Global
  54. LEFÖ/TAMPEP - Beratung und Gesundheitsprävention für Migrantinnen* in der Sexarbeit, Austria
  55. Life Quality Improvement Organisation Flight, Zagreb, Croatia
  56. maiz Autonomes Zentrum von und für Migrantinnen, Austria
  57. Move e. V., Germany
  58. Movimento dxs Trabalhadores do Sexo (MTS), Portugal
  59. National Trans Coalition, Armenia
  60. National Ugly Mugs, United Kingdom
  61. NGO Juventas, Podgorica, Montenegro
  62. Northern Police Monitoring Project, United Kingdom
  63. Odyseus Civic Association, Bratislava, Slovakia
  64. Oikeus työhön (Right to work), Finland
  65. OTRAS, Spain
  66. Outhouse LGBTQ+ Centre, Ireland
  67. Peace Institute, Slovenia
  68. Pembe Hayat LGBTI+ Solidarity Association, Turkey
  69. PICUM - Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants, Europe
  70. PION - The Sex Workers’ Interest Organisation in Norway, Norway
  71. Plattform für Menschenrechte Salzburg, Austria
  72. Positiiviset, HivFinland, Finland
  73. Pro-tukipiste, Finland
  74. ProCoRe, Switzerland
  75. Prostitution Information Center, The Netherlands
  76. Queer Aid, Uppsala, Sweden
  77. Rauða Regnhlífin/Red Umbrella Iceland, Iceland
  78. Reclaim the Agenda, United Kingdom
  79. Red Edition – Verein zur Unterstützung und Beratung marginalisierter professioneller Migrant*innen, Austria
  80. Red Insight Media, The Netherlands
  81. Red Umbrella Athens, Greece
  82. ReShape - United Kingdom
  83. Right Side HRD NGO, Armenia
  84. Romnja Feminist Library, Romania
  85. Roter Stöckelschuh, Germany
  86. Safer Choice, Switzerland
  87. SekswerkExpertise, Platform for the Advancement of Sex Workers’ Rights, The Netherlands
  88. SexTech Nordics, Denmark
  89. SexworkersCollective, Switzerland
  90. Sex Work Research Hub, United Kingdom
  91. Sex Workers Alliance Ireland (SWAI), Ireland
  92. Sex Workers' Rights Lietuva collective, Lithuania
  93. Sex Workers Union, branch of BFAWU, UK
  94. Sex Worker Action Group (SWAG) Berlin, Germany 
  95. Sex Worker Advocacy and Resistance Movement (SWARM), United Kingdom
  96. Scarlet Alliance, Australian Sex Workers Association, Australia
  97. SIO (Sexarbejdernes Interesseorganisation), Denmark
  98. Slut Riot Berlin, Germany
  99. Smart Berlin, Germany
  100. Statewatch, United Kingdom
  101. STRASS, Syndicat du Travail Sexuel, France
  102. SUPERRR Lab, Germany
  103. SWASH - Sex Work And Sexual Health, Japan
  104. SWIPE (Sex Worker Intersectional Peer Education), Italy
  105. SXA - Info Information und Beratung für Sexarbeitende und Multiplikator:innen, Austria
  106. The 6x6 Collective, Berlin, Germany
  107. The Black Sex Worker Collective, Global
  108. The Red Van - Safety, Health and Dignity for Sex Workers, Denmark
  109. The Sex Workers’ Rights Advocacy Network, CEECA region
  110. TGEU - Trans Europe and Central Asia
  111. Together for Safety, Ireland
  112. Turku Pride ry, Finland
  113. Ugly Mugs Ireland, Ireland
  114. Urgent Action Fund, United States
  115. UTSOPI, Belgian Union of Sex Workers, Belgium
  116. Weaving Liberation, Europe
  117. WellVibed, Poland
  118. Women's Collective Ireland Limerick, Ireland
  119. XENIA, Fachstelle Sexarbeit, Bern, Switzerland



Experts (Academics, activists, journalists and all other experts):

  1. Dr Carolina Are, platform governance researcher, UK
  2. Dr Lynzi Armstrong, Associate Professor in Criminology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
  3. Dr Adeline Berry, Senior Research Fellow, UK
  4. Dr Licia Brussa, Human Rights Advocate, Italy
  5. Dr Rosie Campbell OBE, Research Fellow (University of York) and Senior Research Fellow (University of Huddersfield), UK
  6. Dr Laura Connelly, Senior Lecturer, University of Sheffield, UK
  7. Nicklas Dennermalm, PhD student in social work, Stockholm University, Sweden
  8. Barbora Doležalová, PhD Student, Charles University, Czech Republic
  9. Dr Agata Dziuban, Assistant Professor, Institute of Sociology, Jagiellonian University, Poland
  10. Dr Giulia Garofalo Geymonat, Associate Professor in Sociology, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Italy
  11. Benjamin Abt, M.A., sociolinguist and prostitute, Switzerland
  12. Dominika Jasekova, psychologist, Slovakia
  13. Iva Jovovic, Social Worker and Researcher in Social Policy, Croatia
  14. Dr Mathilde Kiening, researcher in psychoanalysis, France
  15. Laura Horsmanheimo, PhD Student, University of Helsinki, Finland
  16. Dr PG Macioti, Doctors of the World France and La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia
  17. Dr M. Wijers LL.M., human rights researcher and activist, the Netherlands
  18. Professor Alison Phipps, sexual violence researcher, UK
  19. Vera Rodriguez, Human Rights and Feminist Advocate, the Netherlands
  20. Christos Sagredos, Associate Lecturer, Deree - The American College of Greece / PhD candidate, King’s College London, UK
  21. Sabrina Sanchez, Human Rights Advocate, Spain
  22. Ira Salo, PhD Student, University of Turku, Finland
  23. Sara Seubert, social worker (B.A.) and psycho-sozial coach (M.A.), Germany
  24. Dr Hanne Stegeman, Lecturer, University of Exeter, UK
  25. Marija Tosheva, Human Rights Advocate, North Macedonia
  26. Dr Niina Vuolajärvi, Assistant Professor in International Migration, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK
  27. Dr Camille Waring, Research Fellow
  28. Dr Larissa Sandy, Associate Professor in Criminology, University of Nottingham, UK
  29. Yigit Aydinalp, PhD Student, University of Sheffield, UK
  30. Dr Fuensanta Gual, CATS, Spain
  31. Dr Isabel Crowhurst, Reader in Sociology, University of Essex, UK
  32. Linda Porn, Human rights advocate and artist, APROSEX, Spain
  33. Aleksandra Kluczyk, Vice Chair, Management Committee, The Sex Workers’ Rights Advocacy Network (SWAN) 
  34. Dr Anna Ratecka, postdoctoral researcher, Södertörn University, Sweden
  35. Kate Fleming, Director, IDEMS International; founder, horizontl, UK
  36. Tom Butt, PhD Student, University of East Anglia, UK
  37. Karin Astrid Siegmann, Associate Professor, Gender and Labour Economics, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), the Netherlands
  38. Dr Giulia Selmi, Associate Professor in Sociology, University of Parma, Italy.
  39. Fernanda Belizario, postdoctoral researcher, University of Coimbra, Portugal
  40. Silke Heumann, Assistant Professor, Sociology and Gender & Sexuality Studies, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), the Netherlands
  41. Dr Rébecca Franco, Postdoctoral researcher, Sociology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
  42. Dr Daisy Matthews, Casual Lecturer (Nottingham Trent University) and Researcher (University of Huddersfield and University of Nottingham), UK
  43. Luca Stevenson, Global Lead Community Engagement and Partnerships, International Planned Parenthood Federation; Board Member, Global Network of Sex Work Projects
  44. Dr Athena Michalakea, Birkbeck, University of London, UK
  45. Fernanda Lobato, PhD student, Sociology, Sciences Po Paris, France
  46. Erin Kilbride, Adjunct Professor & Gender Justice Faculty Fellow, Georgetown University, US
  47. Elizabeth Mc Guinness, M.A., M.Sc., National Ugly Mugs, UK
  48. Fanny Wendt Höjer, PhD candidate, Gender Studies, Uppsala University, Sweden 
  49. Elena Zambelli, Assistant Professor in Sociology, Maynooth University, Ireland
  50. Isabelle Johansson, Criminology and Sociology Lecturer, Kristianstad University, Sweden
  51. Jenny Kronman, PhD student, Gothenburg University, Sweden 
  52. Dr Abeba Birhane, Assistant Professor, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland 
  53. Ines Anttila, sociologist and harm reduction practitioner, Sweden
  54. Linda Palhamn, sexologist and HIV prevention worker, Sweden
  55. Wszebor Sienkiewicz, Campaigner & Media Designer, Germany
  56. Alisha Edwards, M.A., PhD student, Contemporary History, Germany 
  57. Dr Lorena Molnar, researcher, Université de Lausanne and Applied University of Teacher Education Valais, Switzerland
  58. Ray Filar, PhD student, Sussex University, UK
  59. Jaana Ahtiainen, M.A., M.Soc.Sc, PhD Student, University of Helsinki, Finland
  60. Irena Ferčíková Konečná, PhD., researcher and evaluator, Czech Republic
  61. Alexandra Oliveira, PhD., Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Porto, Portugal.
  62. Marie Pueffel, M. Sc., PhD student in Clinical Psycholoy, Bielefeld University, Germany
  63. Deborah Hacke, scientist and social worker, Germany
  64. Dr Marion Pluskota, Assistant Professor of History, Leiden University, The Netherlands
  65. Dr Domitilla (domi) Olivieri, Assistant Professor, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
  66. Kristiina Vesanen, PhD Student, University of Helsinki, Finland
  67. Prof Nick Mai, Professor of Criminology, University of Leicester, UK
  68. Dr Jay Levy, Head of Community and Inequalities Research, UK
  69. Carmela Morgillo, PhD candidate, UCL, UK
  70. Dr Laura Graham, Senior Lecturer, Northumbria University, UK
  71. Dr Robbie Lawlor, Dublin City University, Ireland
  72. Dr Carlotta Rigotti, postdoc researcher, Leiden University, the Netherlands
  73. Dr Iga Jeziorska, researcher and policy analyst, Corvinues University of Budapest, Hungary
  74. Marianne Chargois, artist and activist, Belgium
  75. Anna Giapitzi Papandreou, lawyer, Greece
  76. Silva Mertsola, PhD Student, University of Stockholm, Sweden
  77. Jelena Seidel, political consultant, the Red Van, Denmark

 

Individual Supporters:

  1. Kira Stellar, Sweden
  2. Petter Andersson, Sweden
  3. Tadzio Müller, Germany
  4. Ruby Rebelde, Germany
  5. Annie Lilja, Sweden
  6. Jana Niedermeier, Germany
  7. Birte Martin, Germany
  8. Disa TuvStarr, Sweden
  9. Rikki de la Vega 
  10. Angela Jones
  11. Manuela Hanna, the Netherlands
  12. Dinah de Riquet Bons, France
  13. Cecilia Wachter, Sweden
  14. Andrea Corrales Devesa, Spain
  15. Veronica Munk, Germany
  16. Charlie Stevens, Sweden
  17. Dominic O'Regan, United Kingdom
  18. Erika Lust, Spain
  19. Linus Öberg, Sweden
  20. Bananadickdancing, Spain
  21. Patrik Nilsson, Sweden
  22. Madita Oeming, Germany
  23. Henrik Ekroth, Sweden
  24. Letonde Hermine Gbedo, Italy
  25. Emilie Söderholm, Sweden
  26. Leila Schlater, Sweden
  27. Victoria Hajian, Sweden
  28. Jasmine Hall, Sweden
  29. Jack Mercury, the Netherlands
  30. Robin Lilius-Lundmark, Sweden
  31. Anna Fuchs, Germany
  32. Sebastien Ecoffey, France
  33. Ulf Pettersson, Sweden
  34. Liv Hansson, Sweden
  35. Christian Albrecht, Germany
  36. David Falck, Sweden
  37. Pontus Hessle Sandstedt, Sweden
  38. Eilidh Maclachlan, United Kingdom
  39. Fredi Fernandez, Spain
  40. Meto Rizov, Republic of North Macedonia
  41. Hans-Eirik Pedersen, Norway
  42. Callum Brazener, United Kingdom
  43. Anton Yashin, Sweden
  44. Lyra Bergman, Germany
  45. Jim Aalto, Sweden
  46. D O, Germany
  47. Glenn Halvorsen, Norway
  48. Hans-Eirik Pedersen, Norway
  49. Joanna Rubio, Sweden
  50. Jesper Jansson, Sweden
  51. Angel Fox, the Netherlands
  52. Karin Berg, Sweden
  53. María Barea Jaime, Spain
  54. Emilie Daems, the Netherlands
  55. Anna Fragkaki, Sweden
  56. Ana Ferreira, Portugal
  57. Saleen Gomani Sweden
  58. Jenny Biatch, Lithuania
  59. Rayna Dimitrova, Bulgaria
  60. Sherlyn Assam, United Kingdom
  61. Tanja Huvila, Finland
  62. Leila Tugushi, Georgia

 

 

 

TAKE ACTION AND CLICK HERE TO SIGN OUR STATEMENT AS AN ORGANISATION OR INDIVIDUAL SUPPORTER


Alternatively, you can email [email protected] with your details, and we will add your name or your organisation's name to our list of supporters.





Related articles

Subscribe to ESWA Newsletter

Stay informed about new campaigns, resources and activities. In a time of online censorship and constantly changing algorithms, a trusted newsletter is one of the most reliable ways to stay in touch. Subscribe here to make sure you stay in the loop!