Actividad formativa equivalente a tesis (AFET) para optar al grado académico de magíster en derecho con mención en derecho público. / Este trabajo examina la valoración que hace la autoridad administrativa del conjunto de los elementos de juicio aportados al procedimiento administrativo de determinación de la condición de refugiado. Constata la configuración de dos momentos valorativos, cada uno a cargo de órganos distintos y sometidos a leyes diversas, y de cómo esa circunstancia no contribuye a disolver la incertidumbre acerca de la condición de refugiado, imponiéndose la búsqueda de una solución. Para asegurar la fiabilidad de esa determinación se propone que en la decisión del hecho los órganos competentes apliquen combinadamente los métodos atomista y holista. / This paper examines the assessment made by the administrative authority of all the elements of judgment contributed to the administrative procedure for the determination of refugee status. It notes the configuration of two evaluative moments, each one in charge of different bodies and subject to different laws, and of how that circumstance does not contribute to dissolve the uncertainty about refugee status, imposing the search for a solution. In order to assure the reliability of this determination, it is proposed that in the decision of the fact the competent bodies apply in addition the atomistic and holistic methods.

The overall aim of the thesis is to explore legislators’ perceptions of unaccompanied children in the development of migration law, and how case-officers transform the policy in arguments for and against residency in asylum-cases. More specifically, this thesis explores how Swedish legislators experienced parliamentary work when putting in place the 2005 Aliens Act and the new system for appeals and procedures. In addition, it explores legislators understanding of the concept of unaccompanied minors, and how the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) case-officers understand unaccompanied minors’ credibility. It draws on interview data with 15 legislators of the Swedish parliament and an analysis of 916 decisions in asylum cases concerning unaccompanied minors. The thesis is theoretically informed by interpretative phenomenology and social constructionism. The method used builds on detailed coding procedures in qualitative social research as they are applied in interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), thematic analysis and text analysis. Study 1 examines the experiences of 15 legislators when negotiating migration reform in parliament. The findings indicate that the preceding political negotiations can be one of the reasons for unclear aims when politicians’ propose new legislation. In addition, it seems that other policy areas, such as fiscal considerations and state-municipality relations, took precedence in the negotiations when the legislators were attempting to make sense of their experiences in discussing asylum policy. Study 2 explores legislators’ perceptions of unaccompanied minors arriving in Sweden. The findings show that chronological age is a key reference point concerning how legislators understand unaccompanied minors’ claims for asylum and other needs. In addition, the findings suggest that legislators perceive unaccompanied minors as an ambivalent category and that this understanding is influenced by deep-rooted welfare ideology. Furthermore, the findings indicate that legislators develop policy concerning unaccompanied children without considering that they need to be recognised as individuals with different backgrounds, agendas and needs. Study 3 scrutinises how SMA case-officers construct unaccompanied minors credibility in asylum decisions. It shows that case-officers use similar techniques both when approving and rejecting decisions. These techniques consistently question the competence and political agency of the chid in such a way that the element of individual assessment in asylum procedure can become severely restricted. In brief, this thesis identifies that the connection between migration and child policy is complex as legislators appear to struggle with “drawing the limits” of who to include or exclude in policy aims. Hence, the juridical field was seen as the answer to improve legitimation. This also means that the concept of asylum has become de-politicised. In addition, case-officers also seem to use a limited repertoire of arguments when drawing the limits for unaccompanied minors’ credibility in asylum decisions. This thesis points to possible dilemmas in asylum policy and procedure concerning unaccompanied minors. / <p>At the time of the doctoral defense, the following papers were unpublished and had a status as follows: Paper 1: Accepted. Paper 3: Manuscript.</p>