In an appeal by employees at the Migration Board, the Authority is accused of having serious shortcomings in the operation.
Among other things, the asylum test is described as “neither legitimate, unified, predictable or sustainable,” writes Dagens Nyheter.
In the 18-page letter DN received, an unknown number of people who signed “Migration Board staff” alerted to things they describe as serious deficiencies in the authority. The deficiencies raised include dealing with case handling, cost-effectiveness and governance of the authority.
“The most telling example is that case handling for both asylum and permission than at the time of writing can not be considered as legal, uniform, predictable or sustainable.” It is stated in the call, DN reports.
The call, entitled “Migration Board’s shortcomings and failures must be made visible!” Has been sent to the Justice Department and Migration Minister Heléne Fritzon.
Consequences of prioritizing acidification over unaccompanied people
The staff who wrote the call also criticize the Migration Board’s Director General and former operating director Mikael Ribbenvik. Under his leadership, simple cases were prioritized to improve the numbers and those who questioned the work’s approach were suspended, according to the authors.
According to them, 2016 choices to prioritize cases of acidity over unaccompanied children’s cases have had consequences. Then at least half of the Migration Board’s budget went to housing costs for single-parent children.
“One question that the government should reasonably have thought about is about 120,000 simple decisions, was the most cost effective measure when a day for a single child during the asylum period was an average of 1,900 kronor?” Writes article writers, according to DN.
Other criticisms are raised about how the agency failed to handle cases – despite the fact that human resources were continuously added to shorten the processing time and that the authors consider that there is no plan for how the large-scale cuts of personnel at the Migration Board should be addressed.
The Migration Board’s communications director Fredrik Bengtsson answers some of the criticisms in an email to Expressen.
He opposes a large part of the criticism. Among other things, claims that the asylum process is not legal certainty.
“The Migration Board’s rejection may be appealed in court. In 95 percent of the cases appealed, the courts come to the same conclusion as the Migration Board. “
The message rejected that child affairs should have been prioritized is not correct. Regarding the Migration Board’s budget:
“It is true that if the authority invested all resources in deciding child affairs, the economic outcome would have been less than today, but it must then be related to a reception system that would cover well over 100,000 people for a long time. Many of these individuals in the accommodations with a standard we normally did not use before 2015. “
The message from the Swedish Migration Board also indicates that it is a letterwriter.
“There are many thoughts and opinions about how a large authority like the Migration Board is controlled is both natural and good, but making an anonymous letterwriter to the spokesman and calling that call is remarkable.”