Svenska

Iraqis protection hanging by a thread

Protection coverage for persons fleeing generalized and targeted violence as well as human rights violations is diminishing in Sweden.

In Sweden there are mainly three grounds under which asylum seekers fleeing generalised violence can be granted protection:

1) according to the Refugee Convention,

2) complementary protection based on fear of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or

3) protection for reasons of internal or external armed conflicts or a well founded fear of persecution due to other severe conflicts

In the first two cases as well as in a situation labelled as a severe conflict, the applicant has to prove a well-grounded fear on an individual basis. However if a situation is deemed to be an armed conflict the requirement of proof of individual grounds does not exclude from protection.

Hence, a core issue is what is considered to be an armed conflict in the eyes of the Migration Board and Migration Courts.

In early July 2007 guideline decisions were taken by the Migration Board in three Iraqi cases in an attempt to clarify practice. One Iraqi was granted protection because he could prove individualised persecution but two others had their cases rejected because they based their asylum claim on the general situation in Iraq. All three applicants came from Southern and Central Iraq.

The situation in Iraq could not be classified according to the Board s an armed conflict in the narrow technical sense adopted by the Migration Court of Appeal at the Administrative Court in Stockholm earlier in the year.

This narrow interpretation of "armed conflict" is, however, clearly a choice because in 2004 the Swedish Government stated that: "while applying the rules there is room for both a narrow and generous interpretation of the concept 'internal armed conflict' " (Reg.99-04, p.5).

Protection gap

In Sweden, the problem in relation to the protection of this group thus lies in application of the law. More specifically, it rests on the narrow interpretation of "armed conflict" and the insistence on asylum-seekers having to prove an individualised risk of persecution or serious harm.

The international conventions provide no basis for such individualised persecution criterion. The fact that many people are exposed to violations at the same time does not exclude them from protection in accordance with international norms. As a member of a group of persecuted people, each individual member will typically also be personally persecuted.

This has also been established by the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR. Most recently in August 2007, when they repeat that Iraqis from the Central and Southern Iraq should be considered as refugees based on the 1951 Convention criteria. Sweden is not following these recommendations at present.

Hence, there is a need for a change of practice so that:

- The interpretation of the existing Aliens Act also recognizes as refugees persons exposed to targeted violence due to their membership of a persecuted group, and

- Either a generous interpretation of the concept 'internal armed conflict' is adopted and customized or legislation has to change to also say that persons fleeing indiscriminate violence and gross human rights violations more generally would similarly be in need of international protection.

The previous Swedish Aliens Act, in force until March 2006, included a provision under political-humanitarian grounds which did not require a well-founded individually based fear in a situation of armed conflict to be granted a temporary or permanent residence permit. The current law lacks this provision.

Protection hanging by a thread

Currently over 70% of Iraqi claims are being recognised but if the narrow interpretation of armed conflict is reconfirmed by the appeal courts, this will change and lead to situations where Iraqis in need of international protection are left hanging in legal limbo or forcibly returned.

This already happens to asylum-seekers from Somalia who have also fled armed conflicts and been rejected on these grounds. Moreover, asylum-seekers from Eritrea are rejected and threatened with deportation back to a country marred by violence and human rights violations, despite UNHCR's recommendations.

Over 600 Afghans who were earlier granted one-year temporary permits now risk expulsion.

Iraqis from the KRG area were previously granted temporary permits, which have now expired. Many of these people have been living in Sweden for more than three years, some as long as seven years. Many risk forced removal despite UNHCR recommendations that an individualised assessment of the feasibility of the person being able to re-establish in that area must be made.