Forum for Vegan Rights emblemForum for Vegan Rights

For politicians and decision-makers

FFVR's legislative proposal — a right to vegan food in public services

Forum for Vegan Rights (FFVR) works for the right to vegan food to be recognised through Swedish legislation. Where public services provide meals, the individual should be able to request and receive a nutritionally adequate vegan meal without any requirement of a medical, religious or other special reason.

This is an FFVR model legislative proposal. It is not enacted Swedish law; it is intended to give policymakers a concrete basis for future legislative work.

Contact FFVR

1. Executive summary

What FFVR proposes

FFVR proposes a separate act establishing that, where a public authority or a publicly funded or publicly operated service provides meals, an individual has the right upon request to receive a nutritionally adequate vegan meal.

A statutory right is needed because access today depends on local practice. Provision differs between municipalities, regions and individual units, which creates uncertainty for individuals and unequal treatment across the country.

In practice the right would mean: a request is sufficient, no certificate may be required, the meal must be reasonably equivalent to other meals, and no additional fee may be charged. Decisions to refuse would have to be written, reasoned and appealable.

FFVR considers the proposal compatible with fundamental rights: it strengthens freedom of conscience under Article 9 ECHR and equal treatment under Article 14, while narrow, time-limited and proportionate limitations protect legitimate health, safety and operational interests.

Act on the Right to Vegan Food in Public Services

FFVR model law · Version 1.0 · 2026-08-15

16 sections with purpose, scope, definition, the right itself, equal treatment, children, fees, public responsibilities, limitations, proportionality, written decisions, appeals, supervision, relationship to other legislation and entry into force.

2. The proposed right

A request should be enough

Where a public authority, or a publicly funded or publicly operated service, provides meals, an individual should have the right upon request to receive a nutritionally adequate vegan meal. The right is intended to apply regardless of why the individual chooses vegan food.

  • No medical certificate should be required.
  • No religious certificate should be required.
  • No proof of membership in a vegan organisation should be required.
  • The individual should not have to justify their ethical conviction.
  • The vegan meal should be nutritionally adequate and reasonably equivalent to other meals.
  • No separate fee where comparable meals are provided without one.

3. Scope

Where the proposal would apply

Preschools

Primary and secondary schools

Universities and higher education

Hospitals and healthcare

Elderly care

Residential care

LSS services

Prisons

Detention centres

Other publicly funded services providing meals

The exact legal scope would be determined through the legislative process.

4. Legal foundations

The European Convention on Human Rights

Article 9 — freedom of thought, conscience and religion

Article 9 protects religious and non-religious convictions that attain a sufficient level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance. FFVR considers ethical veganism relevant to that protection, in particular because dietary practice is a direct manifestation of the conviction.

Article 14 — prohibition of discrimination

Article 14 requires that comparable situations are not treated differently without objective and reasonable justification. Where meals are adapted for some convictions or needs but not for ethical veganism, the difference in treatment requires justification.

Proportionality and positive obligations

Any interference must pursue a legitimate aim, be necessary in a democratic society and be proportionate. The Court has also accepted that States may have positive obligations to take reasonable steps to enable a conviction to be manifested, provided this does not impose a disproportionate burden.

Relevant case law

Jakóbski v. Poland (App No 18429/06, 7 December 2010)

A prisoner was refused a meat-free diet corresponding to his Buddhist beliefs. The Court found a violation of Article 9, noting that providing the diet would not have entailed disruption to prison management or a decline in standards for others. The judgment is central to the question of meals adapted to conviction in closed institutions.

Vartic v. Romania (No. 2) (App No 14150/08, 17 December 2013)

The Court confirmed the Jakóbski line: refusing a diet consistent with the applicant's beliefs, without properly assessing whether it could be accommodated, violated Article 9.

G.K. and A.S. v. Switzerland (App Nos 55299/20 and 31515/22, 16 July 2026)

The Court accepted that veganism is regarded as a non-religious belief and that the applicants' convictions met the required level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance. It is the most recent authority on ethical veganism under Article 9.

Text of the Convention · HUDOC

Current law

The Convention does not automatically establish an unconditional right to vegan food in every public-sector context. Assessments are made case by case and depend on proportionality.

FFVR's proposal

FFVR's position is that freedom of conscience, non-discrimination and proportionality together provide an important legal foundation for recognising and strengthening such a right through legislation.

5. Children's rights

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

Article 2 — non-discrimination

Rights must be secured for every child without discrimination, including on the basis of the opinions or beliefs of the child or the child's parents.

Article 3 — best interests of the child

In all decisions concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration, including decisions on school and preschool meals.

Article 12 — the right to be heard

A child capable of forming views has the right to express them, and they shall be given due weight according to age and maturity.

Article 24 — the right to health

Includes the provision of adequate nutritious foods; a vegan meal offered in public services must therefore be nutritionally adequate.

Current law

The Convention, which applies as Swedish law through Act (2018:1197), does not itself establish a general statutory right to vegan food.

FFVR's proposal

It does provide a binding legal framework for how public authorities must assess and decide matters affecting children, which FFVR considers a strong argument for an express statutory right.

Convention on the Rights of the Child (OHCHR) · Act (2018:1197)

Read the children's rights analysis

6. Swedish legal framework

How the proposal relates to existing law

None of the acts below currently provides a general right to vegan food. They set the framework the proposed act would interact with, and indicate where amendments or complementary provisions may be needed.

The Instrument of Government (1974:152)

Chapter 2 protects freedom of religion and conscience and prohibits disadvantageous treatment on grounds of belief; Chapter 1 Section 9 requires objectivity and impartiality.

Act (1994:1219) incorporating the ECHR

The Convention applies as Swedish law, which makes Articles 9 and 14 directly relevant to public meal provision.

The Discrimination Act (2008:567)

Prohibits discrimination on grounds including religion or other belief. The position of ethical veganism is not settled; the proposal would remove that uncertainty for meal provision.

The Education Act (2010:800)

Requires school meals to be nutritious but does not confer a right to a particular diet. A complementary provision would be needed.

The Social Services Act (2001:453)

Requires a reasonable standard of living and respect for self-determination and integrity in elderly and residential care.

The Health and Medical Services Act (2017:30)

Care shall respect the patient's self-determination and integrity; hospital catering falls within the responsibility of the care provider.

LSS (1993:387)

Services shall promote equality in living conditions and full participation, which is relevant to meals in LSS housing and daily activities.

The Prison Act (2010:610)

Enforcement may not entail greater restriction than necessary; combined with Jakóbski this is directly relevant to prison catering.

The Detention Act (2010:611)

Corresponding principles apply to persons held in detention, often for short and unpredictable periods.

The Administrative Procedure Act (2017:900)

Proportionality, the duty to give reasons and service obligations shape how a request for vegan food must be handled.

7. Authorities and official guidance

Existing guidance is not a right

Livsmedelsverket, the Swedish Food Agency, already recognises that a well-composed vegan diet can meet nutritional needs and provides advice for meals in schools, care and healthcare, including on vitamin B12, iron, iodine and calcium, and on the competence required of catering staff.

Livsmedelsverket — vegan food · Meals in care, school and social care · Socialstyrelsen · Skolverket

Existing guidance

Agency guidance is advisory. It describes how vegan meals can be provided well, but it does not give an individual an enforceable claim to receive one.

FFVR's proposed right

The proposed act would convert good practice into an individual right with clear responsibilities, written decisions and legal remedies.

8. Parliamentary background

Previous initiatives in the Riksdag

Vegan and plant-based meals in preschools, schools and public institutions have been raised repeatedly in private members' motions in the Riksdag. FFVR's proposal builds on that existing political and legal discussion, but takes it further by presenting a concrete legislative framework with scope, definitions, limitations and remedies.

Riksdag motions on vegan food (search)Riksdagen — documents and lawsGovernment offices — bills and inquiries

Links point to the official Riksdag and Government databases so that the current documents can be verified at source.

9. Rationale

Why legislation is needed

Differences between municipalities and regions

Provision currently depends on local policy, procurement and individual units, producing markedly different outcomes for people in comparable situations.

Uncertainty for individuals

Without a statutory basis, individuals cannot know in advance whether a request will be granted, or on what grounds it may be refused.

Lack of uniform national standards

Advisory guidance is not applied consistently, and there is no common standard for nutritional adequacy or handling of requests.

Equal treatment

Where meals are already adapted for other convictions and needs, comparable adaptation for ethical veganism should not depend on discretion.

Legal predictability

Written and reasoned decisions with a route of appeal give both individuals and authorities a predictable framework.

Participation in public services

Meals are part of schooling, care and detention. Lack of an adequate meal can restrict a person's ability to take part in the service on equal terms.

10. Core principles

Principles of the proposed legislation

1

Universal access upon request

2

No medical or religious certificate

3

Nutritionally adequate meals

4

Equal treatment

5

No unnecessary additional cost

6

Proportionality

7

Legal certainty

8

An individual right

9

Public-sector responsibility

11. The full model law

Act on the Right to Vegan Food in Public Services

FFVR model lawVersion 1.0 · 2026-08-15

FFVR model law — proposed statutory text with explanatory memorandum

  1. Section 1 Purpose

    The purpose of this Act is to ensure that, where meals are provided within public services, an individual can obtain a nutritionally adequate vegan meal without any requirement of a medical, religious or other special reason.

    The Act further aims at equivalent access throughout the country, predictability for the individual and a clear allocation of responsibility for public bodies.

  2. Section 2 Scope

    This Act applies where meals are provided in activities operated by the State, a municipality or a region, or in activities that are publicly funded or carried out on behalf of a public body.

    The Act applies, among others, to

    • preschools, compulsory schools, upper-secondary schools and other school forms under the Education Act (2010:800),

    • universities and higher-education institutions,

    • health and medical care,

    • elderly care and other residential care,

    • services under the Act (1993:387) concerning Support and Service for Persons with Certain Functional Impairments,

    • prisons and detention centres,

    • other publicly operated or publicly funded services where meals are provided.

    The precise delimitation of scope should be settled in the legislative process.

  3. Section 3 Definition of vegan food

    In this Act, vegan food means meals containing no meat, fish, shellfish, eggs, dairy, honey or other ingredients derived wholly or partly from animals.

    A vegan meal under this Act shall be nutritionally adequate and designed with regard to the dietary advice of the Swedish Food Agency (Livsmedelsverket) and relevant nutritional recommendations.

  4. Section 4 Right to vegan food

    An individual has the right, upon request, to receive vegan food where meals are provided in activities covered by Section 2.

    The right applies irrespective of the reason for the request. The individual is not obliged to state, prove or justify their conviction.

    A certificate from a physician or other healthcare professional, a certificate of religious affiliation, or proof of membership of an organisation may not be required as a condition of the right.

  5. Section 5 Equal treatment

    Vegan food shall be provided in a manner that is reasonably equivalent to the other meals offered in the service in terms of nutritional value, quantity, availability, timing and serving.

    A person requesting vegan food may not be treated less favourably or subjected to differential treatment without objective justification.

  6. Section 6 Children and students

    Where the right under Section 4 concerns a child, the best interests of the child shall be taken into account in accordance with the Act (2018:1197) on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

    The child shall be given the opportunity to express their views, and those views shall be given due weight in accordance with the child's age and maturity.

    A request may be made by the child's guardian or, where the child is of sufficient age and maturity, by the child.

  7. Section 7 No additional fee

    Vegan food under this Act may not be subject to a fee or cost that is not charged for comparable meals in the same service.

  8. Section 8 Responsibilities of public bodies

    The body responsible for the service shall plan, procure and organise meal provision so that the right under Section 4 can be met.

    The responsibility includes ensuring sufficient competence among catering staff, providing information on how a request is made, and handling requests promptly.

    The fact that the service is operated wholly or partly by a private provider on behalf of a public body does not relieve the responsible authority of its obligations under this Act.

  9. Section 9 Limitations and exceptional circumstances

    The right under Section 4 may be limited only where necessary for the individual's health, for the safety of the service, or in an acute and temporary situation where meal provision cannot be maintained.

    Any limitation shall be time-limited and shall cease as soon as the grounds for it no longer exist.

    Economic or administrative inconvenience of limited extent does not in itself justify limiting the right.

  10. Section 10 Proportionality

    A limitation under Section 9 may not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the intended aim. It shall be suitable for achieving that aim and proportionate to the interference it entails for the individual.

    Less intrusive measures shall be considered before the right is limited.

  11. Section 11 Written and reasoned decisions

    A decision that wholly or partly rejects a request under Section 4, or that limits the right under Section 9, shall be in writing, reasoned and notified to the individual.

    The decision shall state the grounds for the assessment and information on how it may be appealed.

  12. Section 12 Appeals and legal remedies

    A decision under Section 11 may be appealed to the general administrative courts. Leave to appeal is required for appeals to the administrative court of appeal.

    For services with specific procedural regulation, the route of appeal should be coordinated with the existing order of instances in the legislative process.

  13. Section 13 Supervision

    Supervision of compliance with this Act is exercised by the authority designated by the Government within each field of activity.

    The supervisory authority may order the responsible body to take corrective action.

  14. Section 14 Relationship to other legislation

    This Act does not restrict rights arising from other legislation.

    The Education Act (2010:800), the Social Services Act (2001:453), the Health and Medical Services Act (2017:30), the Act (1993:387) concerning Support and Service for Persons with Certain Functional Impairments, the Prison Act (2010:610) and the Detention Act (2010:611) otherwise apply in parallel. Consequential amendments may need to be considered.

  15. Section 15 Implementing regulations

    The Government, or the authority designated by the Government, may issue further regulations on nutritional adequacy, information and case handling under this Act.

  16. Section 16 Entry into force

    This Act enters into force on the date determined in the legislative process. Responsible bodies should be given a transitional period to adapt meal provision.

12. Explanatory memorandum

Legal commentary on each provision

Interpretations that represent FFVR's legal position are identified as such. Contested propositions are not presented as established law.

Sections 1–2 — Purpose and scope

Reason
Access to vegan food currently varies between municipalities, regions and individual services. Statutory regulation provides equivalence and predictability.
Current law
Swedish law contains no general statutory right to vegan food. The Education Act requires school meals to be nutritious but does not confer a right to a particular diet.
FFVR position
A single, consolidated scope is preferable to piecemeal amendments of each sectoral act, since otherwise the individual's right depends on which service happens to provide the meal.

Section 3 — Definition and nutritional adequacy

Reason
A legal definition is needed for the right to be predictable and to avoid disputes about what constitutes a vegan meal.
Existing guidance
Livsmedelsverket states that a well-composed vegan diet can meet nutritional needs, and advises on vitamin B12, iron, iodine and calcium. That is guidance, not a rights regulation.

Section 4 — The right and the prohibition on certificate requirements

Reason
Requiring certificates or justifications means, in practice, that an individual must disclose their convictions to access a public service.
ECHR
Article 9 protects freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including non-religious convictions attaining sufficient cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance. The forum internum — not having to disclose one's belief — enjoys particularly strong protection.
Case law
In Jakóbski v. Poland (2010) the Court held that refusing a diet consistent with an individual's conviction in prison could violate Article 9, without unreasonable burden on the State. Vartic v. Romania (No. 2) (2013) confirmed that line.
Possible objection
That an unconditional right risks abuse or entails additional cost.
FFVR response
Experience with other special-diet handling shows the administration is manageable, and Sections 9–10 allow proportionate limitations where genuine obstacles exist.

Sections 5 and 7 — Equal treatment and the fee prohibition

Reason
A formal right has little value if the meal is in practice inferior, served at a different time, or costs extra.
Legal context
The Discrimination Act (2008:567) prohibits discrimination on grounds including religion or other belief. The position of ethical veganism under Swedish discrimination law is not settled; FFVR considers that Article 14 read with Article 9 ECHR supports treating comparable situations alike.

Section 6 — Children and students

CRC
Articles 2, 3, 12 and 24 CRC, which apply as Swedish law through Act (2018:1197), require the best interests of the child to be taken into account and the child to be heard. The Convention does not itself establish a general right to vegan food.
FFVR position
It does, however, provide a weighty interpretive framework when a responsible body decides on a child's meals, and supports giving the child's own views due weight according to age and maturity.

Section 8 — Public responsibility and procurement

Reason
Catering is often run by external providers. Without an express responsibility rule, the right risks falling between the authority and the supplier.
Practical effect
The requirements should be reflected in tender documents, contracts and staff training.

Sections 9–10 — Limitations and proportionality

Reason
No right of this kind can be entirely without exception. Limitations are kept narrow, time-limited and tested against proportionality.
Legal context
Proportionality follows from Section 5(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act (2017:900) and from the Court's assessment of whether an interference is necessary in a democratic society.

Sections 11–13 — Legal certainty, appeals and supervision

Reason
A right without remedies depends in practice on goodwill. Written, reasoned decisions make review possible.
Legal context
Chapter 2 of the Instrument of Government and Articles 6 and 13 ECHR underline the importance of effective remedies and judicial review.

Sections 14–16 — Relationship to other legislation and entry into force

Reason
The Act is intended to complement, not replace, existing sectoral legislation. Consequential amendments to the Education Act, Social Services Act, Health and Medical Services Act, LSS, Prison Act and Detention Act may need consideration.
Implementation
A transitional period gives responsible bodies time to adapt purchasing, menu planning and competence.

For politicians and decision-makers

A basis for future legislative work

FFVR intends this proposal to serve as a basis for future legislative work. We welcome dialogue with members of the Riksdag, political parties, authorities, municipalities and regions on how a statutory right to vegan food can be designed in a legally sound, proportionate and practically workable manner.

Contact FFVR

14. Sources and references

Official sources

Legal accuracy

Swedish law does not currently give everyone a general legal right to vegan food, and the European Convention on Human Rights does not automatically establish an unconditional right to vegan food in every public-sector context. FFVR works for this right to be introduced through legislation, and considers that existing protection of freedom of conscience, non-discrimination and proportionality provides an important legal foundation for recognising and strengthening it.