Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK
For members

SWEDISH CITIZENSHIP

REVEALED: The truth about waiting times at Sweden’s Migration Agency

A new report from Sweden's Parliamentary Ombudsman has found that a number of cases at Sweden's Migration Agency were "not actively processed for the majority of the processing time", despite waits of more than three years.

Published: 13 December 2022 15:33 CET
REVEALED: The truth about waiting times at Sweden's Migration Agency
New Swedish citizens hold up their diplomas at a citizenship ceremony in Sundbyberg, outside Stockholm, this summer. Photo: Janerik Henriksson/TT

What is this report?

The report, which came out on December 13th, addresses complaints to the Parliamentary Ombudsman about long processing times at the Migration Agency for citizenship, asylum and residence permit applications.

In the report, Parliamentary Ombudsman Per Lennerbrant said that the Migration Agency must make “special efforts” to address the long waiting times faced by those applying for asylum, permanent residency, or citizenship in Sweden.

Lennerbrant stated that it is “unacceptable” that the Migration Agency, year after year, has unreasonably long processing times for a large range of cases.

He further criticised the Migration Agency for “slow and passive” processing in all cases which were a subject of the investigation.

How long did these applicants have to wait?

The report, which assessed five cases reported by applicants for Swedish citizenship, asylum and residence permits, concluded that, in all cases, processing times “exceeded what is considered acceptable”.

The five cases are described as follows:

  • “AA”, who applied for Swedish citizenship on May 21st, 2020. In January 2021, a Migration Court concluded that the Migration Agency must conclude “AA”‘s case “as soon as possible”. The case was concluded on February 1st, 2022. Waiting time: 1 year, 8 months, 11 days
  • “BB”, who applied for Swedish citizenship on July 30th, 2018. The case was concluded on March 16th, 2022. Waiting time: 3 years, 7 months, 16 days
  • “CC”, who applied for Swedish citizenship on June 27th, 2018. The case was concluded on March 3rd, 2022. Waiting time: 3 years, 8 months, 4 days
  • “DD”, who applied for asylum in Sweden on January 9th, 2020. The case was concluded on February 18th, 2022. Waiting time: 2 years, 1 month, 9 days
  • “EE”, who applied for a residence permit as a family member (a so-called ‘sambo’ permit), on November 29th, 2020. The case was concluded on March 28th, 2022. Waiting time: 1 year, 3 months, 28 days

What did the Ombudsman say about these cases?

The report concluded that, in all cases, processing times “exceeded what is considered acceptable”.

The report further concluded that all five cases were subject to “long periods of passivity”, stating that four cases were “not actively processed for the majority of the processing time”. One of these cases was concluded after “roughly a week” once a Migration Agency case officer finally started processing it.

In the fifth case, it states, processing “was initially carried out”, with “more than a year” passing before further action was taken, and then “a further ten months” before the case was concluded.

How has the Migration Agency responded?

The Parliamentary Ombudsman demanded a response from the Migration Agency, as well as answers to a number of questions, which it received on June 8th, 2022.

In its response, the Migration Agency stated that it “works to conclude received applications within the dates stipulated by law in all types of case”. It further stated that it “calculates that the goal of being able to conclude asylum and family reunification cases within legal deadlines […] will be reached during 2023,” and that the goal of concluding citizenship cases within six months will also be reached the same year.

It further states that a “new structure to provide support to employees working to conclude cases” was established at the end of 2021 and the beginning of 2022, which introduced a “case concluding support network” for each part of the process.

In March 2022, the Agency continues, “a new process was introduced for cases addressing residence permits due to family reunification, meaning, for example, that all new family reunification cases are handled by a central function which sorts out those cases which should be processed quickly”.

In 2021, the Agency states, an additional centre for handling citizenship cases was opened to “increase recruitment and lower vulnerability”.

It also stated that issues for the Agency which can cause delays include decisions from the Migration Courts demanding that cases should be concluded quickly, which affects the order in which different cases are prioritised, as well as outside factors such as war in Ukraine, which can cause bottlenecks.

The Agency agreed with the Parliamentary Ombudsman that processing times had “not been satisfactory” in any of the five cases addressed by the report.

Does that really mean people applying for citizenship next year will have an answer within six months?

The Parliamentary Ombudsman doesn’t seem to think so. It stated that the investigation shows that “the Migration Agency still has major issues with processing times”, and that it “concludes that it will take years before they reach an acceptable level”.

“In my previous assessment,” Ombudsman Per Lennerbrant said, “I spoke of a fear that the agency’s long processing times would become the norm if serious measures were not taken,” he said.

“I am now forced to confirm that my fears appear to have been valid. The Migration Agency must make special efforts to address the long processing times.”

The Parliamentary Ombudsman has also sent a copy of the decision to Sweden’s governmental offices, as the long waiting times are also in part due to a lack of resources.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

WORK PERMITS

EXPLAINED: How a ‘request to conclude’ can speed up Swedish Migration Agency decisions

If you've been waiting six months or more for a ruling from a Swedish agency you can according to law submit a "request to conclude", forcing the agency to take a decision. Is this worth doing in work permit, residency permit and citizenship cases?

Published: 26 July 2024 11:21 CEST
Updated: 26 July 2024 14:13 CEST
EXPLAINED: How a 'request to conclude' can speed up Swedish Migration Agency decisions

What is a ‘request to conclude’? 

According to Sweden’s Administrative Procedure Act, which came into force in 2018, if an application you have made has not been decided “in the first instance” within six months at the latest, you can request in writing that the agency decide the case, using a process called a dröjsmålstalan, or “request for a case to be expedited”. 

The agency then has four weeks to either take a decision or reject the request to conclude in a separate decision. You can then appeal this rejection to the relevant court or administrative authority. 

You can only use the request to conclude mechanism once in each case. 

READ ALSO: Sweden’s government snubs Migration Agency request for six-month rule exemption

How do you apply for a ‘request to conclude’ a Migration Agency case? 

It’s very easy to fill in the form on the Migration Agency website, which only asks you to give your personal details, say whether your case concerns a work permit, residency permit, right of residency case, or ‘other’, and list any other people applying along with you. You then send the application by post to the Migration Agency address on the form. 

Does it work? 

A lot of people do seem to have success using the mechanism. The Migration Agency in section 9.1 of its annual report says that it is forced to to prioritise those who do this trick after a six month wait ahead of those who have spent longer in the queue. This is particularly the case for the ‘easy’ applications. 

More or less everyone, though, has their initial request to conclude refused, seemingly automatically without the request ever being seen by a case officer. 

Most them are then successful when they then appeal this refusal to the Migration court, with the Migration Agency stating on page 91 of its annual report that it lost 96 percent of such cases in 2021, 80 percent of such cases in 2022 and 77 percent of such cases in 2023.

As the Administrative Procedure Act states clearly that a decision should come within six months, the Migration Agency has in most cases a weak legal position.  

Once your request is rejected you only a short time to appeal, so it is important to act quickly, even if the agency fails to inform you that your request has been rejected. It you have heard nothing and the four weeks are up, it’s important to chase your request so you can appeal before the deadline expires. 

Even those who are rejected and don’t appeal sometimes get results, finding they are asked to submit their passport shortly afterwards. 

However, this is not always the case, so it is essential to go ahead with the appeal anyway, even if your passport is requested. 

What do people say? 

The mechanism appears to be particularly popular among British people, with one member of the Brits in Sweden Facebook page saying that “pretty much everyone has used it”, but it is also used by other groups, such as Indians in Sweden. 

One British woman said she had been informed about the rule by her case officer, and, although she was worried it might make a negative decision more likely, is glad she did so. 

“I used it as it was offered and I didn’t want to wait any longer. I thought there was nothing to lose and it didn’t cost anything, only a bit of time!” she said. 

She had her request for decision accepted, with the officer in four weeks getting back to her requesting that she send in two more forms, one documenting her relationship with an EU citizen, and another on her ability to support herself and pay for her accomodation. 

“It’s a shame they didn’t advertise it more widely and I didn’t hear about it before. as I could have got a decision earlier on my residency application and then could have applied for permanent residency much sooner,” she said. 

Another British woman said that she had decided to send in a request for a decision after she had been waiting for seven months for a decision on citizenship and her case officer told her to expect to wait as long as 36 months, despite being a simple case given that she had lived in Sweden lawfuly for five years, working throughout. 

“I knew of the request to conclude option and used it. They waited the full month before responding and rejecting it, as was expected. But the next day also assigned me a case officer and asked for my passport,” she remembers. “I believe they did this so I wouldn’t appeal their rejection and get the courts support for them to hurry up and process it.” 

Two months later, her citizenship was approved. 

An Indian man said he had used the mechanism no fewer than three times, firstly when extending a work permit, then when applying for permanent residency for a dependent, and thirdly, when applying for citizenship.

In the first case, he said, the request had been accepted on a first attempt and his work permit extension — for which he had been waiting for more than a year — was granted 28 days later.

The second request, which he made after discovering his dependent had no case officer after seven months, was rejected. They appealed, the court ruled in their favour and their case officer gave a positive decision a month later. 

Finally, in the citizenship case, the court ruled in his favour after the request was rejected, but 40 days later he is still waiting for a decision on the initial application.

Does sending in a request increase your chance of having an application rejected? 

Anecdotally, it doesn’t appear to. 

“It was a concern, yes,” the first British woman said, saying she had been told that sending in the form was “no reason to reject my application.” 

“But this is Sweden and in my opinion, even simple or clear-cut things can be a gamble,” she added. 

How does the mechanism affect handling times overall? 

While the request-to-conclude mechanism might help applicants in individual cases, the Migration Agency complains that it has been making the problem of long processing times worse by creating an addition set of processes case officers need to handle, and also by affecting the agency’s ability to prioritise. 

“The fact that many individuals request that their cases be decided is taking up a lot of resources and leading to processing times generally becoming longer, not least as many delay cases are appealed to the court,” Mikael Ribbenvik, the Migration Agency’s former Director General said when asking for the agency to be exempted from the system in April 2023. 

SHOW COMMENTS