Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Ett permanent beslut? - Om förhållandet mellan principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft och möjligheten att återkalla beviljade permanenta uppehållstillstånd.

Östergren, Hanne LU (2023) JURM02 20231
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
According to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, a decision favourable to an individual cannot be changed or revoked after the decision has been dispatched or otherwise notified to the addressee. The principle can be described as a guarantee of legal certainty, as is it considered to ensure security, stability, and predictability for individuals. The principle has gradually developed through case law and doctrine and is today regulated in section 37(2) in the Administrative Procedure Act. A few exceptions to the principle have been crystallised, reserved for situations where the public interest of accuracy and security outweighs the security of the individual. In EU law, there is a principle, the principle of... (More)
According to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, a decision favourable to an individual cannot be changed or revoked after the decision has been dispatched or otherwise notified to the addressee. The principle can be described as a guarantee of legal certainty, as is it considered to ensure security, stability, and predictability for individuals. The principle has gradually developed through case law and doctrine and is today regulated in section 37(2) in the Administrative Procedure Act. A few exceptions to the principle have been crystallised, reserved for situations where the public interest of accuracy and security outweighs the security of the individual. In EU law, there is a principle, the principle of legitimate expectations, which corresponds with the national principle. According to the principle of legitimate expectations, individuals must be able to rely on a decision-maker not revoking what has previously been decided. The principle thus offers support for the premise of the irreversibility of favourable decisions.

The principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions can also be said to be expressed through the rules on residence permits for persons in need of protection according to the Aliens Act. In order to qualify as a refugee or a person in need of subsidiary protection, an alien must prove that he or she does not constitute a threat to national security. The Aliens Act is largely based on international conventions and directives, entailing that those who qualify as refugees or persons in need of subsidiary protection are considered to be in need of international protection. The Swedish regulatory framework is based on the general rule that granted permanent residence permits shall remain in force unless there are grounds for revocation or cessation. The legislator has reserved the right to revoke a residence permit in situations where the residence permit is based on incorrect information from the individual, where the individual constitutes a security threat or where the foreigner’s residence in the country has ceased. According to an explicit rule in the Aliens Act, if revocation based on incorrect information or security reasons is required, the legal practitioner must always consider the alien’s connection to the country and whether this speaks against revocation. The Aliens Act also contains preclusion periods which must be regarded in the event of revocation, which further favours the general rule of irreversibility.

In the Tidö Agreement, the Government, together with the Sweden Democrats, presented an ambition to revoke granted permanent residence permits with the aim to a paradigm shift in the view of the right to asylum. None of the existing grounds for revocation in the Aliens Act allow such a change, which is why the possibility of introducing retroactive legislation needs to be examined. This thesis therefore discusses the relationship between the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions and the possibility of revoking granted permanent residence permits. After studying the purpose and function of the principle as well as the legislator’s motivation behind the grounds for revocation in the Aliens Act, the legal situation appears to be that the irreversible nature of granted favourable decisions must weigh heavily – even in migration law. Although there is no prohibition against retroactive legislation in the Swedish administrative law, the legal position appears to be that some caution should nevertheless be taken in situations where the legislation affects individuals.

Following a discussion based on the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, it can be concluded that a system allowing the revocation of permanent residence permits granted to persons in need of protection, does not appear to be entirely unproblematic. The Aliens Act has gone from a system of permanent residence permits as the general rule, to temporary residence permits as the general rule. Despite this, this thesis asserts that the legislator nevertheless, in the legislative history, has emphasized the importance of the government providing security and stability for persons in need of protection. According to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, individuals can enjoy a security in the sense that the decisions granted remain in force. The proposal to introduce a system enabling the revocation of granted residence permits may therefore appear unpredictable. The proposal to give the persons concerned the opportunity to obtain Swedish citizenship following the possible revocation of permanent residence permits also risks being contrary to the principle, as it cannot be ruled out that the proposal may be disadvantageous to some.

A system contrary to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions risks being regarded as legally uncertain, which is why the legislator, according to the conclusion of this thesis, should exercise caution in working towards a changed system for residence permit holders. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft innebär att beslut som är gynnande för en enskild inte kan ändras eller återkallas efter det att beslutet expedierats eller tillkännagivits för adressaten på annat sätt. Principen beskrivs som en rättssäkerhetsgaranti då den anses tillförsäkra trygghet, stabilitet och förutsebarhet för enskilda. Principen har långsamt växt fram genom praxis och doktrin och finns idag reglerad i 37 § 2 st. FL. Till principen har det utkristalliserats ett antal undantag, som tar sikte på de situationer då allmänhetens intresse av korrekthet och säkerhet anses väga tyngre än den enskildes trygghet. Inom EU-rätten existerar en motsvarande princip, principen om berättigade förväntningar, som korresponderar väl... (More)
Principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft innebär att beslut som är gynnande för en enskild inte kan ändras eller återkallas efter det att beslutet expedierats eller tillkännagivits för adressaten på annat sätt. Principen beskrivs som en rättssäkerhetsgaranti då den anses tillförsäkra trygghet, stabilitet och förutsebarhet för enskilda. Principen har långsamt växt fram genom praxis och doktrin och finns idag reglerad i 37 § 2 st. FL. Till principen har det utkristalliserats ett antal undantag, som tar sikte på de situationer då allmänhetens intresse av korrekthet och säkerhet anses väga tyngre än den enskildes trygghet. Inom EU-rätten existerar en motsvarande princip, principen om berättigade förväntningar, som korresponderar väl med den nationella principen. Enligt principen om berättigade förväntningar ska enskilda kunna förlita sig på att en beslutsfattare inte tar tillbaka vad denne beslutat, och erbjuder härigenom stöd för utgångspunkten om gynnande besluts orubblighet.

Principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft kan även sägas komma till uttryck i reglerna om uppehållstillstånd för skyddsbehövande i utlänningslagen. För att kunna kvalificera som flykting eller alternativt skyddsbehövande måste en utlänning bevisa att denne lever upp till de krav som stadgas i utlänningslagen och att denne inte utgör ett hot mot den nationella säkerheten. Utlänningslagen grundar sig i stor utsträckning på internationella konventioner och direktiv, varför de som kvalificerar som skyddsbehövande anses vara i behov av internationellt skydd. Det svenska regelverket är uppbyggt utifrån huvudregeln att beviljade permanenta uppehållstillstånd ska bestå såvida ingen återkallelsegrund eller upphörandegrund aktualiseras. Lagstiftaren har förbehållit sig rätten att återkalla uppehållstillstånd i de situationer då uppehållstillståndet grundar sig på oriktiga uppgifter från den enskilde, om den enskilde utgör ett säkerhetshot eller då utlänningens bosättning i landet har upphört. Om återkallelse på grund av oriktiga uppgifter eller säkerhetsskäl aktualiseras måste rättstillämparen, enligt en uttrycklig regel i utlänningslagen, alltid beakta utlänningens anknytning till landet och om detta talar emot återkallelse. Utlänningslagen innehåller också preklusionsfrister som måste iakttas vid återkallelse, vilket ytterligare talar för utgångspunkten om orubblighet.

I Tidöavtalet presenterade regeringen tillsammans med Sverigedemokraterna en önskan om att beviljade permanenta uppehållstillstånd ska återkallas mot bakgrund av önskan om ett paradigmskifte i synen på asylrätten. Inga av de befintliga återkallelsegrunderna i utlänningslagen torde tillåta en sådan ändring, varför möjligheten att införa retroaktiv lagstiftning som tillåter detta behöver utredas. I uppsatsen förs därför en diskussion av förhållandet mellan principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft och möjligheterna att återkalla beviljade permanenta uppehållstillstånd. Efter att ha studerat syftet bakom och funktionen med principen samt lagstiftarens motivering bakom utlänningslagens återkallelsegrunder, framstår rättsläget som att orubbligheten för beviljade gynnande beslut ska väga tungt - även på migrationsrättens område. Trots att det inte föreligger något förbud i svensk förvaltningsrätt mot retroaktiv lagstiftning, framstår rättsläget som att viss försiktighet ändock bör iakttas i de situationer som lagstiftningen berör enskilda.

Utifrån en diskussion med utgångspunkt i principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft, kan det i denna uppsats konstateras att en ordning som tillåter återkallelse av permanenta uppehållstillstånd som beviljats skyddsbehövande inte framstår som helt oproblematisk. Trots att utlänningslagen gått från en ordning med permanenta uppehållstillstånd enligt huvudregeln till tidsbegränsade uppehållstillstånd som huvudregel, visar utredningen på att lagstiftaren i förarbeten likväl betonat vikten av att regerverket medför trygghet och stabilitet för skyddsbehövande. Utifrån principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft åtnjuter enskilda denna trygghet när beviljade beslut består. Förslaget att införa en ordning som möjliggör återkallelse av beviljade permanenta uppehållstillstånd kan därför framstå som oförutsebart. Även förslaget om att ge berörda personer möjlighet att erhålla svenskt medborgarskap riskerar att stå i strid med principen, då det inte går att utesluta att förslaget kan vara till nackdel för en del.

En ordning som står i strid med principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft riskerar att betraktas som rättsosäker, varför lagstiftaren, enligt uppsatsens slutsats, bör iaktta försiktighet i arbetet mot en ändrad ordning för uppehållstillståndsinnehavare. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Östergren, Hanne LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
A permanent decision? - On the relation between the principle of negative legal force of favorable decisions and the possibility of revoking granted permanent residence permits.
course
JURM02 20231
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
förvaltningsrätt, rättsvetenskap, migrationsrätt, uppehållstillstånd, negativ rättskraft, Tidöavtalet
language
Swedish
id
9115864
date added to LUP
2023-06-14 10:05:48
date last changed
2023-06-14 10:05:48
@misc{9115864,
  abstract     = {{According to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, a decision favourable to an individual cannot be changed or revoked after the decision has been dispatched or otherwise notified to the addressee. The principle can be described as a guarantee of legal certainty, as is it considered to ensure security, stability, and predictability for individuals. The principle has gradually developed through case law and doctrine and is today regulated in section 37(2) in the Administrative Procedure Act. A few exceptions to the principle have been crystallised, reserved for situations where the public interest of accuracy and security outweighs the security of the individual. In EU law, there is a principle, the principle of legitimate expectations, which corresponds with the national principle. According to the principle of legitimate expectations, individuals must be able to rely on a decision-maker not revoking what has previously been decided. The principle thus offers support for the premise of the irreversibility of favourable decisions. 

The principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions can also be said to be expressed through the rules on residence permits for persons in need of protection according to the Aliens Act. In order to qualify as a refugee or a person in need of subsidiary protection, an alien must prove that he or she does not constitute a threat to national security. The Aliens Act is largely based on international conventions and directives, entailing that those who qualify as refugees or persons in need of subsidiary protection are considered to be in need of international protection. The Swedish regulatory framework is based on the general rule that granted permanent residence permits shall remain in force unless there are grounds for revocation or cessation. The legislator has reserved the right to revoke a residence permit in situations where the residence permit is based on incorrect information from the individual, where the individual constitutes a security threat or where the foreigner’s residence in the country has ceased. According to an explicit rule in the Aliens Act, if revocation based on incorrect information or security reasons is required, the legal practitioner must always consider the alien’s connection to the country and whether this speaks against revocation. The Aliens Act also contains preclusion periods which must be regarded in the event of revocation, which further favours the general rule of irreversibility. 

In the Tidö Agreement, the Government, together with the Sweden Democrats, presented an ambition to revoke granted permanent residence permits with the aim to a paradigm shift in the view of the right to asylum. None of the existing grounds for revocation in the Aliens Act allow such a change, which is why the possibility of introducing retroactive legislation needs to be examined. This thesis therefore discusses the relationship between the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions and the possibility of revoking granted permanent residence permits. After studying the purpose and function of the principle as well as the legislator’s motivation behind the grounds for revocation in the Aliens Act, the legal situation appears to be that the irreversible nature of granted favourable decisions must weigh heavily – even in migration law. Although there is no prohibition against retroactive legislation in the Swedish administrative law, the legal position appears to be that some caution should nevertheless be taken in situations where the legislation affects individuals.

Following a discussion based on the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, it can be concluded that a system allowing the revocation of permanent residence permits granted to persons in need of protection, does not appear to be entirely unproblematic. The Aliens Act has gone from a system of permanent residence permits as the general rule, to temporary residence permits as the general rule. Despite this, this thesis asserts that the legislator nevertheless, in the legislative history, has emphasized the importance of the government providing security and stability for persons in need of protection. According to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions, individuals can enjoy a security in the sense that the decisions granted remain in force. The proposal to introduce a system enabling the revocation of granted residence permits may therefore appear unpredictable. The proposal to give the persons concerned the opportunity to obtain Swedish citizenship following the possible revocation of permanent residence permits also risks being contrary to the principle, as it cannot be ruled out that the proposal may be disadvantageous to some. 

A system contrary to the principle of negative legal force of favourable decisions risks being regarded as legally uncertain, which is why the legislator, according to the conclusion of this thesis, should exercise caution in working towards a changed system for residence permit holders.}},
  author       = {{Östergren, Hanne}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Ett permanent beslut? - Om förhållandet mellan principen om gynnande besluts negativa rättskraft och möjligheten att återkalla beviljade permanenta uppehållstillstånd.}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}