Dröjsmålstalan 12 § förvaltningslagen - En undersökning om 12 § FL är ändamålsenlig vid ansökan om svenskt medborgarskap

Abstract (Swedish)

Fram till och med första juli år 2018 saknade svensk lagstiftning ett allmänt rättsmedel för dröjsmål vid myndigheters handläggning av ärenden. Genom införandet av 12 § förvaltningslagen (2017:900) (FL) kom rättsmedlet som ofta benämns som dröjsmålstalan att förändra Migrationsverkets rutiner samt hantering av medborgarskapsansökningar. Myndigheter som tidigare kunde vara passiva vid handläggning av ett ärende är numera tvungna att fatta ett beslut inom en viss föreskriven tid.

Sedan införandet av 12 § FL har Migrationsverket fått kritik från bland annat Justitieombudsmannen (JO) där det i ett flertal inkomna rapporter påvisats brister och passivitet från myndigheten. Kritiken har varit främst riktad till medborgarskapsenheternas handläggning av ansökningar om svenskt medborgarskap. I vissa ärenden har sökande vid medborgarskapsenheterna fått vänta flera år innan ett avgörande om svenskt medborgarskap har fattats.

Mot bakgrund till det ovan nämnda valde jag att undersöka hur ändamålsenhetlig dröjsmålsbestämmelsen i 12 § FL är gentemot Migrationsverkets handläggning av svenskt medborgarskap. Vidare har jag även valt att undersöka om Migrationsverkets handläggning av svenskt medborgarskap följer rättsprinciperna i 1 kap. 9 § RF.

Undersökningen har visat att dröjsmålsbestämmelsen i en allt för stor omfattning brister hos Migrationsverket vid ansökningar om svenskt medborgarskap. Implementeringen av 12 § FL har varit förknippad med stora utmaningar för myndigheten vilket har bidragit till överträdelser av de skyldigheter som åligger förvaltningsmyndigheter, att i sin verksamhet beakta allas likhet inför lagen samt iaktta saklighet och opartiskhet, som anges i 1 kap. 9 § RF.

Abstract

Until July 1, 2018, Swedish legislation lacked a general remedy for delays in the authorities’ handling of cases. With the introduction of section 12 of the Public Administration Act the remedy, often referred to as the delay action, came to change the Swedish Migration Agency’s routine handling of citizenship applications.

Authorities would henceforth not be able to act passively in the handling of active cases. Presently a decision must be made within a certain time.

Since the introduction of the remedy according to section 12 § of the Public Administration Act, the Swedish Migration Agency has been under criticism for violations of the section.

The criticism has predominantly been directed at the citizenship units of the Swedish Migration Agency. In some cases, applicants at the citizenship units have had to wait several years before a decision on their Swedish citizenship.

I have chosen to examine how the purpose of section 12 of the Public Administration Act has been implemented at the Swedish Migration Agency, as it relates to Swedish citizenship applications. Furthermore, I have also chosen to investigate whether the Swedish Migration Agency’s handling of Swedish citizenship follows the principles of objectivity, impartiality and everyone’s equality before the law, as outlined in the Swedish constitution.

The essay has shown that the general remedy for delays in the authorities’ handling of cases is lacking at the Swedish Migration Agency. Related to applications for Swedish citizenship, the implementation of Section 12 of the Public Administration Act has been associated with major challenges and, in some cases, even contributed to violations of the Swedish constitution.

Court judgments, together with interview and e-mail correspondence, have shown a nearly failing authority within the Swedish Migration Agency’s citizenship units.

I propose that the Section 12 of the Public Administration Act should include a fine when authorities incur a delay. The fine must require a fixed payment to the government and the amount should increase gradually based on the number of deviations.

Furthermore, applicants should not have to request a decision in their case when authorities are delayed. This should be the automatic responsibility of the authorities and based upon their routine practices.

Finally, authorities should bare a responsibility to voluntarily report to the Ombudsman in the event of violations of section 12 of the Public Administration Act. The reporting should contribute to a preventative purpose, allowing the Ombudsman to act and criticize authorities earlier. The report do also contributes to determining the size amount of the fine that the authority should be required to pay to the government.

• author: Pazoki, Borna
• supervisor: Vilhelm Persson
• organization: Department of Law; Faculty of Law
• course: JURM02 20221
• year: 2022
• type: H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
• subject: Law and Political Science
• keywords: förvaltningsrätt, dröjsmålstalan
• language: Swedish
• id: 9080621
• date added to LUP: 2022-06-20 20:36:12
• date last changed: 2022-06-20 20:36:12