50 years of amnesties – exceptions as part of Swedish migration policy
If one were to explain why Sweden has become such a major destination for immigration, it is down to political decisions and elections, according to researcher Henrik Emilsson.
Since the 1970s, around 100,000 people have been allowed to stay in Sweden through amnesties – due to a combination of practical and humanitarian reasons. This is according to researcher Henrik Emilsson, who sees parallels with today's debate on the deportation of teenagers.
In a new study, Emilsson has reviewed all political decisions on amnesties for refugees since 1976. There is a total of 20 decisions, which he has divided into six groups.
Emilsson identifies a number of reasons for the amnesties, which have changed over time. “Humanitarian reasons have always played an important role, but bureaucratic reasons are also common. It is simply political choices that partly explain why Sweden has become such a major immigration country: the parties have agreed on the line to take.
“Politicians have always believed that equal rights are very important. If there are thousands of people in the country without residence permits, the easiest solution is to make them legal,” says Emilsson, a senior lecturer who researches migration and integration policy.
Many factors come into play
A common thread in the amnesties is that politicians have been unable to accept that thousands of people are living in Sweden without legal rights. Sometimes it has been difficult to deport people, and humanitarian reasons have been considered. The Migration Agency has been unable to manage the situation, and consideration has been given to children. Many different factors come into play; sometimes all the circumstances come together and an amnesty becomes possible, according to Emilsson.
For a long time, Sweden's self-image was that of a moral role model, but after the 2017 law on upper secondary education for unaccompanied minors, policy has become significantly stricter.
“It is largely the same people who decided on the old policy as on the new one. If 80 per cent of the government was previously in favour, 80 per cent is now against a generous migration policy,” says Emilsson.
More party politics and protests
Previously, the government could decide on asylum issues itself, as when the conservative government granted 40,000 Bosnians permanent residence permits in 1993. Since migration policy has been subject to the Swedish Parliament, both the political debate and reactions from public opinion have increased.
“Now it's more about party politics, the media, and protests from civil society. There is pressure on politicians. When we had unaccompanied minors after the refugee crisis, there was a sit-in protest in Stockholm,” says Emilsson.
According to Emilsson, the Social Democrats and the centre-right Moderates have often tried to resist amnesties, but the smaller coalition parties have had a major influence. For example, in 2005, the Green Party and the Left Party forced through a temporary asylum law.
He sees a current parallel in the discussion about the now-paused deportations of teenagers.
“Amnesties have taken place about every ten years, and now the discussion is back on the table. Each time is an exception, but since it has happened 20 times, it is not an exception but a natural part of Swedish migration policy,” adds Emilsson.
