Advanced

Rättssäkerhet och säkerhetshot - En empirisk utredning av rättssäkerheten i ärenden där en utlänning ansetts utgöra ett hot mot rikets säkerhet

Vincze, Andras LU (2017) JURM02 20171
Department of Law
Abstract
Since the major migration flows reached Sweden in the summer of 2015, have once again the immigration legal questions become the subject of public debate. As a result, a report showed that the Swedish Migration Agency handled asylum applications in a flawed manner. The flaws have mostly referred to the issues of the rule of law. In addition to this, a further aspect has also received attention and it is the one about national security. With the increased amount of immigration matters there was also an increase in so called security cases. Against this background and with a focus on the legal certainty in the process the purpose of this paper, on one hand have been to investigate witch legal rights an individual who will have their case... (More)
Since the major migration flows reached Sweden in the summer of 2015, have once again the immigration legal questions become the subject of public debate. As a result, a report showed that the Swedish Migration Agency handled asylum applications in a flawed manner. The flaws have mostly referred to the issues of the rule of law. In addition to this, a further aspect has also received attention and it is the one about national security. With the increased amount of immigration matters there was also an increase in so called security cases. Against this background and with a focus on the legal certainty in the process the purpose of this paper, on one hand have been to investigate witch legal rights an individual who will have their case handled as a security matter have and, secondly, if the rule of law had been affected by the sudden increase in case volume. To achieve the latter purpose of the investigation, empirical material has been studied. Finally, the purpose was to investigate whether there are tendencies in international, European Union law or national practice that suggests a changed view in relation to security risks, which in turn can affect national law enforcement.

The review has shown that with EU law requirements for an effective remedy and the right to justice, security cases was transferred to the usual instance of procedure that previously belonged to the Government's competence. Legislative history in the previous regulation had described the courts role in a detailed way. In the new regulation, however there were no such descriptions. With the security police determine who poses a security risk during the initiation of a case was now the question of whether the Court should review this information. With background of EU case law and legal source material it was established that courts should take a controlling part of the classification, reviewing all case facts, much like how it was in the former system. In the question of which procedural guarantees the individual was granted, it was found that there were restrictions in party insight, this was also the case in relation to the individual’s public counsel. In comparison with the underlying EU directive, which had higher demands in regards of the public counsels right to transparency, there was a lack of conformity. The review showed that the legislature had disposed of the issue of giving the public counsel transparency to the investigating authority or the Court. It was thus unclear whether the public counsel in actual meaning was given access to the confidential material, and if the individual thereby fulfilled an effective opportunity of defence.

The result of the empirical study shows that the court in most cases verify the information witch led the individual deemed to pose a security risk. On the issue of party insight, the court has in the majority of cases given the individual transparency of the material. The shortcomings that have been made has exclusively been attributable to the period just after security matters was transferred to the usual instance of procedure. Thus, the legal certainty of the individual seems to be fulfilled, both in relation to the EU directive, but even despite the largest migration flows in modern Swedish history. Some fear does however remain for a possible lowering of the threshold of what constitutes a security matter in view of recent EU case-law. It remains to be seen how this develops. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Sedan de stora migrationsströmmarna nådde Sverige under sommaren 2015 har åter igen de migrationsrättsliga frågorna blivit aktuella. Till följd av detta har en rapport visat att migrationsverket hanterat asylansökningar på ett bristfälligt sätt. Bristerna har främst hänfört sig till frågor rörande rättssäkerhet. Utöver detta har ytterligare en aspekt uppmärksammats och det är den om rikets säkerhet. Med tillströmningen av ärenden följde även en ökning av så kallade säkerhetsärenden. Mot bakgrund av detta och med utgångspunkt från ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv har syftet med denna uppsats dels varit att utreda hur rättsskyddet ser för en enskild som får sitt ärende hanterat som ett säkerhetsärende, dels om rättssäkerheten hade påverkats av... (More)
Sedan de stora migrationsströmmarna nådde Sverige under sommaren 2015 har åter igen de migrationsrättsliga frågorna blivit aktuella. Till följd av detta har en rapport visat att migrationsverket hanterat asylansökningar på ett bristfälligt sätt. Bristerna har främst hänfört sig till frågor rörande rättssäkerhet. Utöver detta har ytterligare en aspekt uppmärksammats och det är den om rikets säkerhet. Med tillströmningen av ärenden följde även en ökning av så kallade säkerhetsärenden. Mot bakgrund av detta och med utgångspunkt från ett rättssäkerhetsperspektiv har syftet med denna uppsats dels varit att utreda hur rättsskyddet ser för en enskild som får sitt ärende hanterat som ett säkerhetsärende, dels om rättssäkerheten hade påverkats av det plötsliga tillskottet i ärendemängden. För att uppnå det sistnämnda har empiriskt material studerats. Slutligen har syftet även varit att utreda om det finns tendenser i internationell, unionsrättslig eller nationell praxis som tyder på en förändrad syn i förhållande till säkerhetsrisker vilket i sin tur kan påverka den nationella rättstillämpningen.

Genomgången har visat att med EU-rättens krav på ett effektivt rättsmedel och rätten till domstolsprövning överfördes säkerhetsärenden till den vanliga instansordningen från att tidigare tillhört regeringens kompetens. I den tidigare ordningen hade förarbetena beskrivit domstolarnas roll i processen på ett långtgående sätt. I den nya ordningen fanns dock inga föreskrifter om detta. I och med att Säkerhetspolisen avgör vem som utgör en säkerhetsrisk vid initiering av ett ärende var nu frågan om domstolen skulle kontrollera dessa uppgifter. Mot bakgrund av EU-rättslig praxis och juridiskt källmaterial fastslogs att domstolarna borde inta en kontrollerande form i betydelsen att domstolen skulle kontrollera alla sakuppgifter i ärendet. Således likt den äldre ordningen. I fråga om vilka rättssäkerhetsgarantier den enskilde hade tillgodosetts kunde konstateras att inskränkning fanns i frågan om partsinsyn, detta gällde även i förhållande till den enskildes offentliga biträde. I jämförelse med det bakomliggande EU-direktivet, vilket ställde högre krav i fråga om det offentliga biträdes rätt till insyn, fanns här en brist på överensstämmelse. Genomgången visade att lagstiftaren hade överlåtit frågan om att ge det offentliga biträdet insyn till utredande myndigheten eller den domstolen. Det var således oklart om det offentliga biträdet i faktiskt mening fick tillgång till det sekretessbelagda materialet och om den enskilde därigenom tillgodosågs en faktisk möjlighet till försvar.

Resultatet av den empiriska utredningen har dock visar att ansvarig domstol i majoriteten utav målen kontrollerar de uppgifter vilka föranlett att den enskilde ansetts utgöra en säkerhetsrisk. I frågan om partsinsyn har domstolen i majoriteten utav målen tillgodosett den enskilde insynen i materialet. De brister som väl kunnat hittas har uteslutande varit hänförliga för tiden strax efter säkerhetsärenden övergick till den vanliga instansordningen. Således förfaller rättssäkerheten för den enskilde vara tillgodosedd, både i förhållande till EU-direktivet men även trots den största migrationsströmmen i modern svensk historia. Vissa farhågor finns dock för att tröskeln kan sänks i fråga om vad som utgör ett säkerhetsärende mot bakgrund av EU-domstolens relativt nya praxis. Det återstår dock att se hur detta kommer utvecklas. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Vincze, Andras LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The rule of law and security threats - an empirical investigation of the rule of law in cases where an alien is considered to be a threat to national security
course
JURM02 20171
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Säkerhetsärenden, Förvaltningsrätt, Rättssäkerhet, Migrationsrätt, Förvaltningsprocessrätt, Säkerhetshot
language
Swedish
id
8908895
date added to LUP
2017-06-08 11:58:23
date last changed
2017-08-15 04:10:50
@misc{8908895,
  abstract     = {Since the major migration flows reached Sweden in the summer of 2015, have once again the immigration legal questions become the subject of public debate. As a result, a report showed that the Swedish Migration Agency handled asylum applications in a flawed manner. The flaws have mostly referred to the issues of the rule of law. In addition to this, a further aspect has also received attention and it is the one about national security. With the increased amount of immigration matters there was also an increase in so called security cases. Against this background and with a focus on the legal certainty in the process the purpose of this paper, on one hand have been to investigate witch legal rights an individual who will have their case handled as a security matter have and, secondly, if the rule of law had been affected by the sudden increase in case volume. To achieve the latter purpose of the investigation, empirical material has been studied. Finally, the purpose was to investigate whether there are tendencies in international, European Union law or national practice that suggests a changed view in relation to security risks, which in turn can affect national law enforcement.

The review has shown that with EU law requirements for an effective remedy and the right to justice, security cases was transferred to the usual instance of procedure that previously belonged to the Government's competence. Legislative history in the previous regulation had described the courts role in a detailed way. In the new regulation, however there were no such descriptions. With the security police determine who poses a security risk during the initiation of a case was now the question of whether the Court should review this information. With background of EU case law and legal source material it was established that courts should take a controlling part of the classification, reviewing all case facts, much like how it was in the former system. In the question of which procedural guarantees the individual was granted, it was found that there were restrictions in party insight, this was also the case in relation to the individual’s public counsel. In comparison with the underlying EU directive, which had higher demands in regards of the public counsels right to transparency, there was a lack of conformity. The review showed that the legislature had disposed of the issue of giving the public counsel transparency to the investigating authority or the Court. It was thus unclear whether the public counsel in actual meaning was given access to the confidential material, and if the individual thereby fulfilled an effective opportunity of defence.

The result of the empirical study shows that the court in most cases verify the information witch led the individual deemed to pose a security risk. On the issue of party insight, the court has in the majority of cases given the individual transparency of the material. The shortcomings that have been made has exclusively been attributable to the period just after security matters was transferred to the usual instance of procedure. Thus, the legal certainty of the individual seems to be fulfilled, both in relation to the EU directive, but even despite the largest migration flows in modern Swedish history. Some fear does however remain for a possible lowering of the threshold of what constitutes a security matter in view of recent EU case-law. It remains to be seen how this develops.},
  author       = {Vincze, Andras},
  keyword      = {Säkerhetsärenden,Förvaltningsrätt,Rättssäkerhet,Migrationsrätt,Förvaltningsprocessrätt,Säkerhetshot},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Rättssäkerhet och säkerhetshot - En empirisk utredning av rättssäkerheten i ärenden där en utlänning ansetts utgöra ett hot mot rikets säkerhet},
  year         = {2017},
}