Är Asylprocessen i Sverige Rättssäker? : En Undersökning om de Offentliga Biträdena och Ombudens Roll före och efter Reformerna 2006.
Abstract (Summary)The Swedish asylum process, as it appeared before 2006, was debated and criticised. It was know to lack transparency and, therefore, to leave to much room for political rather than legal decisions. A new law regulating asylum and immigration was created in 2005. The asylum process was reformed and opened, among other things, up for the possibility for asylum seekers to receive a trial in special courts; Migrationsdomstolar.Since one of the goals with the reforms was to make the process more transparent, the Swedish Migration Board (Migrationsverket) made their database for country specific information available to the public. The public defenders were granted a more significant role in pleading his or her clients cause. During a trial in court the client will meet the Migration Board. The reforms have thus opened up for the possibility for the client to have a stronger position in the process, where much of the responsibility of ensuring this falls upon the assigned counsel.Because of the changes in the asylum process in 2006, and the high level of responsibility given to the public defenders following the reforms, this thesis aims at evaluating the rule of law in the Swedish asylum process. Focus is on the public defenders and the method of investigation a self-administered survey distributed to the public defenders in Malmö region. A theoretical discussion including the Swedish Rechtstaat and possibilities of lesson-drawing from programs across jurisdictions, various areas and time, is used as a framework for comparing the asylumprocess before and after the reforms.The survey results support the hypothesis that the legal security in the asylum process has been improved following the reforms and the introduction of the new law. The process is more transparent, more secure and more predictable. The investigation has, however, illuminated some infected areas of the asylum process. The fact that the Migration Board assignes the counsels, and thus has got the opportunity to select their opponent in court, is one of these problematic areas. Another concerns the country specific information in the Migration Board’s database. The database has not only been criticised for not being up to date but has also been said to be preferred and seen as more reliable in the special courts.
School:Högskolan i Jönköping
Source Type:Master's Thesis
Date of Publication:09/07/2007