<p>Som den svenska asylprocessen såg ut innan 2006, var den omdiskuterad och hårt kritiserad. Processen sades sakna insyn och ansågs därför alltför öppen för beslut tagna baserat på politiska, snarare än juridiska, grunder. År 2005 skapades en ny Utlänningslag. Även asylprocessen reformerades och den nya ordningen innebär bland annat möjligheten för asylsökande att få sin sak prövad i särskilda domstolar; Migrationsdomstolar.</p><p>Då målet med reformerna var att skapa en öppnare process offentliggjordes även Migrationsverkets databas för landinformation. De offentliga biträdena och ombuden som Migrationsverket tilldelar asylsökande fick utvidgade arbetsuppgifter. Vid prövning i Migrationsdomstol möter klienten med biträde Migrationsverket som motpart. Reformerna har bidragit till en möjlig stärkt ställning för den asylsökande beroende på hur den sökandes talan förs. Mycket av detta ansvar beror därför på klientens biträde.</p><p>Med anledning av reformerna som trädde i kraft år 2006 och de offentliga biträdenas betydande roll syftar denna uppsats till att utvärdera rättssäkerheten i den svenska asylprocessen genom att rikta fokus på biträdena i processen. Undersökningsmetoden utgörs av ett enkätutskick till offentliga biträden i Malmö region. Undersökningen backas upp av en teoretisk diskussion om den svenska rättsstaten, de svenska statsmakterna och så kallad lesson-drawing. Det senare innebar möjligheten till att dra lärdom från andra länder, områden eller skeden, där brister i rättssäkerheten uppdagas. Detta ramverk har använts i syfte att jämföra asylprocessen före och efter reformerna.</p><p>Resultatet av enkätundersökningen stödjer hypotesen om att rättssäkerheten i asylprocessen ökat sedan reformerna och den nya lagen trädde i kraft. Processen upplevs som tydligare, mer rättssäker och mer öppen överlag. Undersökningen har dock belyst områden av processen som fortfarande hotar förutsägbarheten samt lämnar många biträden missnöjda över sin arbetssituation. Det faktum att Migrationsverket utser biträdena och på så vis kan påverka sin egen motpart i Migrationsdomstolen är ett problem som hotar rättsäkerheten. Migrationsverkets landinformation kritiseras även för att vara otillräckligt och anses ibland ha företräde i domstol, vilket belyser ytterligare infekterade områden.</p> / <p>The Swedish asylum process, as it appeared before 2006, was debated and criticised. It was know to lack transparency and, therefore, to leave to much room for political rather than legal decisions. A new law regulating asylum and immigration was created in 2005. The asylum process was reformed and opened, among other things, up for the possibility for asylum seekers to receive a trial in special courts; Migrationsdomstolar.</p><p>Since one of the goals with the reforms was to make the process more transparent, the Swedish Migration Board (Migrationsverket) made their database for country specific information available to the public. The public defenders were granted a more significant role in pleading his or her clients cause. During a trial in court the client will meet the Migration Board. The reforms have thus opened up for the possibility for the client to have a stronger position in the process, where much of the responsibility of ensuring this falls upon the assigned counsel.</p><p>Because of the changes in the asylum process in 2006, and the high level of responsibility given to the public defenders following the reforms, this thesis aims at evaluating the rule of law in the Swedish asylum process. Focus is on the public defenders and the method of investigation a self-administered survey distributed to the public defenders in Malmö region. A theoretical discussion including the Swedish Rechtstaat and possibilities of lesson-drawing from programs across jurisdictions, various areas and time, is used as a framework for comparing the asylumprocess before and after the reforms.</p><p>The survey results support the hypothesis that the legal security in the asylum process has been improved following the reforms and the introduction of the new law. The process is more transparent, more secure and more predictable. The investigation has, however, illuminated some infected areas of the asylum process. The fact that the Migration Board assignes the counsels, and thus has got the opportunity to select their opponent in court, is one of these problematic areas. Another concerns the country specific information in the Migration Board’s database. The database has not only been criticised for not being up to date but has also been said to be preferred and seen as more reliable in the special courts.</p>

The primary aim of this paper is to broaden the perspective on third party rights of appeal in Swedish municipal planning and to study the underlying ideals that have formed the legislation in the Planning and Building Act. Currently the legislation is undergoing several changes and with the present housing crises in several Swedish cities the pressure to streamline the process is hard. Third party rights of appeals are viewed upon as time consuming obstacles, which both hinders the expansion in housing and economic growth. Several propositions on how to improve the legislation have been evaluated over the years, the most important proposal being the removal of the county administration board as the first of three instances for planning appeals. The research questions seeks to address the overall aim by using a genealogical lens to study the history of the right to appeal municipal development plans, and compare this to the parallel debate on the subject as well as the contemporary discussion. The bulk of material has been gathered through interviews with experts connected to the subject, and the study of official governmental investigations as well as newspaper articles. The theoretical part about planning ideals draws heavily on the work of Geriant Ellis on Ireland and his critics of the economic interests that form the debate there. The conclusions gathered from the study paints an image that differs from the one presented in the media of increasing problems with the Swedish appealing system. Instead it questions the proposed changes and their possible effect on the principals on legal security, citizen participation and democracy in the planning process. The percentage of appeald plans has been relatively consistent throughout the years since around the millenium, regardless of political majority, changes in legislation or economic fluctuations. The most noticable change, but surprisingly the least discussed; is the shift from appeals belonging to the political sphere of representative democracy, to the judicial sphere. This change has not been followed by any ideological discussions, and seemingly came out of necessity due to bureaucracy and the European convention. This change however, has not been communicated to the public; leading to that credence to the system as such has been left deminished. Swedish planning is at its core a political and value loaded issue, therefore making it a question of right or wrong by changing the system of appeal to a question of pure judicial nature should have raised a bigger ideological discussion. Especially before changing the system again towards being even more law oriented

Som den svenska asylprocessen såg ut innan 2006, var den omdiskuterad och hårt kritiserad. Processen sades sakna insyn och ansågs därför alltför öppen för beslut tagna baserat på politiska, snarare än juridiska, grunder. År 2005 skapades en ny Utlänningslag. Även asylprocessen reformerades och den nya ordningen innebär bland annat möjligheten för asylsökande att få sin sak prövad i särskilda domstolar; Migrationsdomstolar. Då målet med reformerna var att skapa en öppnare process offentliggjordes även Migrationsverkets databas för landinformation. De offentliga biträdena och ombuden som Migrationsverket tilldelar asylsökande fick utvidgade arbetsuppgifter. Vid prövning i Migrationsdomstol möter klienten med biträde Migrationsverket som motpart. Reformerna har bidragit till en möjlig stärkt ställning för den asylsökande beroende på hur den sökandes talan förs. Mycket av detta ansvar beror därför på klientens biträde. Med anledning av reformerna som trädde i kraft år 2006 och de offentliga biträdenas betydande roll syftar denna uppsats till att utvärdera rättssäkerheten i den svenska asylprocessen genom att rikta fokus på biträdena i processen. Undersökningsmetoden utgörs av ett enkätutskick till offentliga biträden i Malmö region. Undersökningen backas upp av en teoretisk diskussion om den svenska rättsstaten, de svenska statsmakterna och så kallad lesson-drawing. Det senare innebar möjligheten till att dra lärdom från andra länder, områden eller skeden, där brister i rättssäkerheten uppdagas. Detta ramverk har använts i syfte att jämföra asylprocessen före och efter reformerna. Resultatet av enkätundersökningen stödjer hypotesen om att rättssäkerheten i asylprocessen ökat sedan reformerna och den nya lagen trädde i kraft. Processen upplevs som tydligare, mer rättssäker och mer öppen överlag. Undersökningen har dock belyst områden av processen som fortfarande hotar förutsägbarheten samt lämnar många biträden missnöjda över sin arbetssituation. Det faktum att Migrationsverket utser biträdena och på så vis kan påverka sin egen motpart i Migrationsdomstolen är ett problem som hotar rättsäkerheten. Migrationsverkets landinformation kritiseras även för att vara otillräckligt och anses ibland ha företräde i domstol, vilket belyser ytterligare infekterade områden. / The Swedish asylum process, as it appeared before 2006, was debated and criticised. It was know to lack transparency and, therefore, to leave to much room for political rather than legal decisions. A new law regulating asylum and immigration was created in 2005. The asylum process was reformed and opened, among other things, up for the possibility for asylum seekers to receive a trial in special courts; Migrationsdomstolar. Since one of the goals with the reforms was to make the process more transparent, the Swedish Migration Board (Migrationsverket) made their database for country specific information available to the public. The public defenders were granted a more significant role in pleading his or her clients cause. During a trial in court the client will meet the Migration Board. The reforms have thus opened up for the possibility for the client to have a stronger position in the process, where much of the responsibility of ensuring this falls upon the assigned counsel. Because of the changes in the asylum process in 2006, and the high level of responsibility given to the public defenders following the reforms, this thesis aims at evaluating the rule of law in the Swedish asylum process. Focus is on the public defenders and the method of investigation a self-administered survey distributed to the public defenders in Malmö region. A theoretical discussion including the Swedish Rechtstaat and possibilities of lesson-drawing from programs across jurisdictions, various areas and time, is used as a framework for comparing the asylumprocess before and after the reforms. The survey results support the hypothesis that the legal security in the asylum process has been improved following the reforms and the introduction of the new law. The process is more transparent, more secure and more predictable. The investigation has, however, illuminated some infected areas of the asylum process. The fact that the Migration Board assignes the counsels, and thus has got the opportunity to select their opponent in court, is one of these problematic areas. Another concerns the country specific information in the Migration Board’s database. The database has not only been criticised for not being up to date but has also been said to be preferred and seen as more reliable in the special courts.