The thesis examines accompanied asylum-seeking children’s position in Swedish asylum reception management and in the determination of their claims. The three articles of the thesis focus on children’s own experiences of seeking asylum, on the experiences and practices of the civil servants at the Migration Board, as well as those of the legal representatives that assist asylum-seekers in the application process. The thesis builds on ethnographic fieldwork carried out between 2008 and 2010 in southwest Sweden. Theoretical inspiration has been sought in the new sociology of childhood as well as in practice theory. The first article in the thesis concerns children’s caseworkers who are responsible for safeguarding children’s interests in the Migration Board’s daily work with reception. The study highlights a range of dilemmas caseworkers have to deal with in their role as frontline bureaucrats. The study shows that the children’s caseworkers often perceive their discretion as limited, but also that they themselves contribute to limiting it, for example due to their hesitation in challenging existing norms and collegiality.    The second article examines the ways in which legal representatives, who act on behalf of families in asylum determinations, in their practice perceive and relate to the concept of children’s best interests and children’s right to participate. The study shows that children in families can become invisible in the legal representatives’ daily rounds. This invisibility is due to practical limitations in the representatives’ work as well as a general view that children rarely have their own grounds for asylum, as separate claimants to their parents. The third paper of the thesis explores the ways in which children experience and seek to influence circumstances that signify their time spent as asylum-seekers. The study shows how the children developed a range of tactics to deal with their particular situations, which varied with their housing and schooling, and the family’s financial resources. The conclusion is that the children themselves are the primary representatives of the child perspective in the asylum-seeking process, not least through their struggle to belong and create a life like that of ’ordinary’ children.  In line with previous research in the field, the thesis points to the contradiction between the principle of regulated migration and the child perspective in the asylum-seeking process. Together with practical circumstances, such as lack of resources, this contradiction results in a more limited implementation of the child perspective than rules and regulations actually stipulate. Finally, the thesis points to the active role asylum-seeking children take in their efforts to create an everyday life that is as similar as possible to that of  the ’ordinary’ children (e.g. non asylum-seeker and permanently settled children) around them. / <p>At the time of the doctoral defense, the following paper was unpublished and had a status as follows: Paper 1: Submitted.</p>

Legal regulation of the status of persons with special needs in the EU Asylum directives (Abstract) By the very nature of their status, applicants for international protection and recognized refugees are among the most vulnerable persons. Within this group, there is also a subgroup of persons with special problems, risks and needs that make them even more vulnerable. This subgroup of persons with special needs is provided special protection within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The foundation of this special protection consists of three legal acts commonly referred to as asylum directives - the Reception directive, the Qualification directive and the Procedural directive, adopted between 2003 and 2005 The legal status of persons with special needs is an important topic in the current discussion on the amendments to the Asylum directives and the general development of the CEAS system. The Dissertation "Legal regulation of the status of persons with special needs in EU Asylum directives" has an ambition to contribute to this core discussion on the future content of the European asylum acquis. The paper analyses EU regulations and related national laws relevant to the treatment of this group of applicants for international protection as defined in art. 17 para. 1 of the Reception directive. Based on...

Définie comme droit national puis comme droit communautaire depuis l’adoption de la Convention de Dublin en 1990 par les États membres, la politique d’asile de l’Union européenne est devenue indissociable de sa politique migratoire. Le contexte des arrivées massives d’exilés dans l’Union européenne au cours des années 2010 a permis à l’UE de renforcer l’intégration de la demande d’asile dans une politique sécuritaire en la hiérarchisant, la catégorisant et en renforçant l’externalisation de son traitement. Cependant, en confirmant le mécanisme « Dublin » qui appelle à la solidarité des États membres dans la prise en charge des demandeurs d’asile, l’Union européenne, qui formait jusque-là un bloc unifié institutionnellement autour des valeurs des droits de l’Homme et de la démocratie, est désormais traversée par des conflits qui laissent ouverte la question de l’intégration et du rejet des demandeurs d’asile et qui révèlent une crise plus large. / Defined as national law and then as Community law since the adoption of the Dublin Convention in 1990 by the Member States, the asylum policy of the European Union has become inseparable from its migration policy. The context of the mass influx of exiles into the European Union in the course of 2010 has allowed the EU to strengthen the integration of asylum demand into a security policy by prioritizing, categorizing and strengthening the outsourcing of its treatment. However, by confirming the « Dublin » mechanism which calls for the solidarity of the Member States in the care of asylum seekers, the European Union, which until then formed an institutionally unified blocaround the values of the human rights and democracy, is now crossed by conflicts that leave open the question of integration and rejection of asylum seekers and reveal a wider crisis.

Studiens syfte var att klargöra och redovisa för de främjande och försämrande faktorer som är betydelsefulla för asylsökande barns psykosociala välmående. Enligt vår förförståelse som vi erhållit genom arbetslivserfarenhet och utbildning lever de asylsökande barnen under svåra omständigheter och vi ansåg det viktigt att undersöka de påverkande faktorerna. Den metod som användes var en kunskapsöversikt som tolkades hermeneutiskt. Kunskapsöversikten baserades på 10 primärstudier och resultaten visade på följande främjande faktorer; skola, föräldrar/familj, adekvat information gällande beslutsprocessen, en väl fungerande barnpsykiatrisk vård, sociala nätverk och fritidsaktiviteter. De försämrande faktorerna var; bristfällig information och lång väntan under asylprocessen, föräldrars ohälsa, okunskap hos professionella om barnens lagstadgade rättigheter samt osäkra boendevillkor. Studiens resultat analyserades utifrån teorin Känsla av sammanhang. Resultatet ligger i linje med tidigare forskning. / "Outside I´m smiling, but inside I´m crying" - A litterary review of factors affecting the asylum seeking children´s psychosocial health. The study´s purpose was to examine the promoting and detoriating factors that are of importance for the psychosocial well-being of children seeking asylum. According to our prior understanding which we have acquired through working experience and education the asylum seeking children lives under difficult circumstances. We therefor considered it important to investigate the factors that are influencing the children. The method used was a review of the litterature which was interpreted hermeneutically. The review was based on 10 primary studies and results showed promoting factors as; school, parents/family, adequate information regarding the decision-making, a well-functioning child mental health service, social networks and leisure activities. The deteriorative factors were; lack of information and delays during the asylum process, parents´illness, ignorance among professionals about children´s legal rights and unsafe housing conditions. Our results were analysed based on the theory Sense of coherence. The results are in line with previous research.

This thesis analyzes the ignored humanitarian concerns in the development of the EU Asylum Policy. As a result of the strict migration control concerns, EU has engaged in forming a new regional refugee protection system which is tacitly based on limiting the access of protection seekers to the EU territories. In that context, the thesis aims to assess the scope and impact of the externalizing tendencies in the EU asylum policy development and thereby aims to attract the attention to the contradiction that EU falls in its human rights and refugee protection commitments while trying to prevent refugees from arriving to the Union&rsquo / s territories. To this aim, after giving a general account of the development of EU Asylum competence, the thesis will extensively deal with the pre-entry and the post-entry access prevention measures which act to serve to this access prevention strategy. Under pre-entry access prevention measures, the thesis will deal with the visa requirement, carrier sanctions and other complementary tools which prevent the protection seekers from ever arriving at the EU territory. Under the post-entry access prevention mechanisms the thesis will analyze the &lsquo / safe third country&rsquo / and &lsquo / host third country&rsquo / implementations and readmission agreements which aim to divert the protections seekers summarily out of the EU territories. In analyzing these policies, the thesis will try to demonstrate how EU Member States try to shirk their non-refoulment obligation, which is the heart of the refugee protection regime, through applying legitimate deemed means.

I kölvattnet av den så kallade flyktingkrisen 2015 har allt fler röster höjts i Europa om att förändra asylrätten för skapa ett mer förutsebart och hållbart asylmottagande. Diskursen synliggör asylrättens centrala rättighetskonflikt där det allmännas intresse av reglerad invandring vägs mot den enskildes rätt till asyl. Denna uppsats utreder möjligheterna att ersätta EU:s nuvarande asylsystem med ett EU-gemensamt kvotflyktingsystem. Utgångspunkten för uppsatsen är ett förslag som Moderaterna under oktober 2017 antog i sitt partiprogram vars innebörd är att EU ska övergå till ett gemensamt asylsystem med enbart kvotflyktingmottagande. Frågeställningen är vilka hinder som föreligger för en sådan förändring med hänsyn till gällande rätt och ändamålen bakom asylrätten. Moderaterna föreslår alltså en ordning som skulle inskränka rätten att söka asyl. Rättighetsinskränkningar ska vara proportionerliga. Uppsatsen besvarar därför huvudfrågeställningen utifrån fyra delfrågor som påminner om en proportionalitetsbedömning för att avgöra om förslaget är möjligt eller lämpligt. Först diskuteras om dagens asylsystem behöver förändras med hänsyn till den så kallade flyktingkrisen 2015, sedan utreds andra brister i dagens system. Slutsatsen nås att det finns brister med dagens system som motiverar en förändring som exempelvis de höga dödstalen för migranter som reser över Medelhavet för att söka asyl i EU. Därefter undersöks vilka möjligheter en förändring till enbart ett EU-gemensamt kvotflyktingsystem skulle kunna medföra och det konstateras att förslagets största fördel är att vidarebosättning utgör en laglig och säker väg för asylsökande till EU. Kärnan i uppsatsen är utredningen av de praktiska och juridiska hinder som finns för en förändring till enbart ett EU-gemensamt kvotflyktingsystem. Där finner jag att det största hindret är svårigheten att organisera systemet på ett sätt som är förenligt med principen om non-refoulement enligt såväl folkrätten som Europakonventionen. Jag identifierar även andra allvarliga praktiska och juridiska hinder för en sådan ordning. Slutligen undersöks om det finns alternativa lösningar att tillgå som är mindre ingripande än förslaget om enbart ett EU-gemensamt kvotflyktingsystem. Jag finner att så är fallet. Till exempel kan medlemsstaterna öka sitt kvotflyktingmottagande, införa humanitära visum eller inrätta en EU-centraliserad asylprövning. Min slutsats är att rätten att söka asyl på plats i EU måste kvarstå och att de mindre ingripande lösningarna som tas upp i uppsatsen är att föredra framför ett asylsystem i EU med enbart kvotflyktingmottagande.

Cette étude sociologique propose une analyse comparée de l’institution française (l’OFPRA) et allemande (le BAMF) chargées de l’instruction des demandes d’asile. L’enquête de terrain réalisée en leur sein a permis une description détaillée des pratiques administratives encadrant le processus d’élaboration des décisions sur les dossiers de demande. Des différences notables s’observent tant au niveau du profil socioprofessionnel des agents instructeurs de chacune des deux institutions nationales qu’à propos des attitudes générales de ces derniers face à la problématique de l’asile. Au-delà de ces différences, une remise en doute et une profonde méfiance face aux déclarations des demandeurs d’asile constituent une constante dans leur pratique professionnelle. L’importance que l’institution attribue à la question de la crédibilité des récits d’asile confère un pouvoir discrétionnaire significatif aux agents administratifs et laisse une place importante à l’intime conviction dans le processus décisionnel. La délicate communication avec les demandeurs et l’application parfois malaisée des textes de loi nationaux et internationaux aux problématiques présentées par ces derniers imprègnent l’instruction des dossiers d’une grande incertitude. L’analyse de la relation administrative entre demandeurs et décideurs permet finalement d’identifier la méfiance réciproque et le décalage entre les catégories juridiques et la réalité des migrations contemporaines comme deux problèmes centraux des dispositifs d’asile français et allemand. / This sociological study is a comparative analysis of the French (OFPRA) and German (BAMF) institutions in charge of processing asylum claims. Fieldwork on their premises enabled a detailed description of the administrative practices that frame the application-based decision-making process. Notable differences were observed between the two national institutions regarding the socio-professional profiles of the instructing agents but also the latter’s general attitudes towards the asylum issue. Beyond these differences, a constant in their professional practice can be found in an attitude of doubt and deep mistrust towards asylum seekers. In the evaluation of the applicant’s asylum accounts, institutions give great importance to the issue of credibility. This bestows a considerable discretionary power to the administrative agents. It also introduces a strong element of subjectivity in the decision-making process. Because of the delicate nature of communication with the applicants and the sometimes difficult application of national and international legislation to each particular case, the administrative decision-making process is imbued with great uncertainty. The analysis of the administrative relationship between applicants and decision-makers enables to identify the mutual mistrust and the gap between legal categories and the reality of contemporary migration as two central problems in the French and German asylum systems.

The question of increasing immigration and refugee pressure in Europe has become a sensitive political and economic issues, and also subject to ideological conflicts, not only in countries that face this phenomenon most intensively, but also in those member states that are not considered to be typical immigrant states such as the Czech Republic. While during the previous crisis in the eurozone and the Greek debt crisis the division of the EU to the north and south could be observed, migrant crisis in 2015 divided the EU in another way. It is rather excessive compassion of the West on one side and xenophobic attitude of Eastern European countries on the other. Diploma thesis will examine the similarities and differences of opinions on solving the migrant crisis between the two EU member states, which represent these two ideological poles, Germany and the Czech Republic, with the regard to their international legal obligations, obligations of membership in the EU and protection of their own national interests. It will also examine what influences the formation of these opinions and what role can the phenomenon of migration crisis play in the building or a change of state identity.

L’exigence de l’ordre public interne et internationale justifie une limitation du droit fondamental à l’asile. Le Code de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d’asile, la convention de Genève du 28 juillet 1951et la législation européenne dessinent les contours de cette clause d’ordre public. Pourtant, le candidat à l’asile ou le bénéficiaire d’une protection peuvent craindre d’être persécutés en cas de retour dans leur pays d’origine. Comment dès lors comprendre un refus de protection ou le retrait d’un statut protecteur et la mise en œuvre de cette clause ? / The requirement of the internal and international public order justifies a limitation of the basic right to asylum. The Code of the entry and the stay from abroad and the right of asylum, the Geneva Convention of July 28th, 1951 and the EU law draw contours of this clause of public order. However, the candidate with asylum or the recipient of a protection can fear to be persecuted in the event of return in their country of origin. How consequently to understand a refusal of protection or withdrawal of a protective statute and the implementation of this clause?

Das Thema Asyl spaltet Dresden. In sämtlichen Altersstufen und Schichten finden sich verschiedenste Positionen: Vertreter_innen einer offenen Willkommenskultur, aber auch Personen mit Wut auf Geflüchtete. Der größte Teil der Dresdner Bevölkerung (40,6%) hat Verständnis und Sympathie für Menschen, die in Deutschland Asyl suchen. Dagegen zeigen deutlich weniger Befragte (20,4%) Abwertungen und Feindlichkeit gegen Asylsuchende. Viele Menschen sind jedoch noch unentschlossen, welche Positionen sie zum Thema Asyl vertreten (39%).