sou · GTB3103 · 2006-01-01 00:00:00 — In 2005, the Commission submitted an interim report in which it presented draft constitutional amendments and other measures pertaining to the provisions on the nuclear family in the Family reunification directive. The Commission's proposals pertaining to the Directive concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents were presented in full in the interim report. The person residing in and with whom the relative applying for a permit has ties is referred to by the Commission as the 'sponsor'. This is also the term used in the Family reunification directive. Relatives referred simply to 'the person living in with whom the applicant has family ties'. The Commission feels that the term 'sponsor' shall continue to be used to denote the person who resides in or who has been granted in . As far as citizens of EEA countries or are concerned, special provisions should in addition apply, as they do now, allowing family reunification to be authorised. Family reunification with the nuclear family The term 'nuclear family' refers to spouse, registered partner, cohabitee and minor children. The Commission's has already sub- mitted proposals in its interim report concerning the nuclear families of third-country nationals. In its discussions of the pro- posal, the Government has taken the initiative to make the provi- sions independent of nationality. According to the Commission, the Government's proposals will achieve effective and uniform legislation. The Commission concurs therefore with the proposals. The Commission also proposes that a provision be introduced to the effect that what is said about a permit for a foreign national who is or intends to cohabit with a sponsor shall also be true for a foreign national who is or intends to cohabit with a citizens of an EEA country or who holds a Swedish permit. Family reunification with parents and adult children Concerning parents and adult children, Article 4.2 of the Family reunification directive stipulates that Member States may (not shall which applies to spouses and minor children) authorise family reunification. As a possible condition of reunification concerning parents, the directive states that the parents are dependent on the sponsor or his or her spouse and do not enjoy proper family support in the country of origin. Concerning adult children, the conditions for authorising are that they are objectively unable to provide for their own needs on account of their state of health. With regard to the fact that Article 4.2 is optional, it is incumbent on Member States themselves to determine the conditions of family reunification with parents and adult children. Swedish law does not therefore need to be adapted in order to be compatible with the Directive in this respect. The Commission feels however that it is appropriate to use the Family reunification directive as the starting-point for the proposals being submitted. The Family reunification directive is what is known as a 'minimum directive' and provides scope for more generous conditions. Bearing in mind what has been presented, the proposals of Relatives cannot be said to contravene the Family reunification directive. The proposals do not therefore need to be adapted in order to be compatible with the Directive in this respect. From the Commission's point of view, the focus of the proposals put forward by Relatives, namely to consider a relaxation in the conditions for granting to for example parents on the grounds of family ties, is still valid. The Commission proposes that may be granted to parents and adult unmarried children if a state of dependence exists between the parent or adult child and the sponsor that cannot be dealt with in any other way. This proposal implies the revocation of the currently valid joint household requirement. The relationship of dependence that must exist under the proposal need not have existed when the persons in question lived together abroad. The fact that it exists at the time of application for family reunification should be sufficient. Neither does the application have to be made as soon as the sponsor has moved to . state of dependence, that may concern the sponsor or the relative, can be personal or financial in nature. The scope for introducing a support requirement as a condition of family reunification with parents and adult unmarried children is discussed below. Family reunification with other close relatives The Family reunification directive contains no provisions relating to relatives who are neither part of the nuclear family nor parents or adult children. Similar to Relatives, the Commission feels that scope should be created for a freer, case- by-case assessment by allowing consideration of all the reasons that exist in a particular case. The conditions for granting family reunification for other close relatives should, as a consequence of their family law status, be very restrictive, however. As proposed by Relatives, a requirement for 'exceptional circumstances' should apply. The Commission proposes that may only be granted to these relatives in exceptional circumstances. The Commission does not propose any special provisions entitling persons who are the 'last link' (i.e. who have all their relatives in ) to automatic . A requirement for 'exceptional' circumstances, however, means that last-link cases in particular can be considered for . When assessing individual cases, the age and living conditions of the relative, how well he or she has maintained contact as well as circumstances of a more humanitarian nature should be taken into consideration. A support requirement as a condition for granting in these cases is discussed below. One of the Commission's tasks has been to investigate the possible scope for introducing a support requirement as a condition of family reunification with relatives other than spouses, cohabitees in established relationships and minor children. Swedish legislation pertaining to aliens has previously provided for such a requirement. A guarantee that the sponsor can support and provide for the incoming relative is a common requirement in other countries. Under the Family reunification directive, Member States may demand evidence that there is suitable accommodation, sickness insurance and stable and regular resources which are sufficient to maintain the sponsor and members of his or her family. The arguments for and against a support requirement Reduced costs to society seem to be the primary argument for the introduction of a requirement that the foreign national has guaranteed support as one of the conditions of . Many of the financial benefits provided by society, such as social insurance benefits, would however apply to a person who has fulfilled any requirement for guaranteed support. Since there are no maintenance obligations pertaining to adults and grown-up children in , means- tested benefits could not be denied even if such a category of person were subject to a support requirement. As far as is concerned, therefore, the only effect of a support requirement would be to prevent relatives from being granted in the country. The existence of a support requirement in other countries may constitute an argument in favour of introducing one in . The Commission feels however that it is uncertain whether simply the existence of such a requirement in other countries would in itself have a steering effect on the immigration of relatives into . An argument in favour of a support requirement is that it might lead to fewer permits being applied for on the grounds of sham marriages or relationships. The principle of nuclear family unity is an argument against the introduction of a support requirement as a condition for a nuclear family member to be granted , however. The signalling effect such a requirement would have regarding each individual's responsibility to support him or herself is uncertain. There are groups of foreign nationals who are already vulnerable and in a weak position. Such persons may find it difficult to fulfil the support requirement. Consideration of groups that are already vulnerable is therefore an argument against introducing such a requirement into Swedish law. Existing income inequalities between women and men would lead to their chances of bringing a relative to being unequal, particularly if the sponsor is single. Gender equality aspects also therefore constitute an argument against introducing a support requirement. When considering the pros and cons of a support requirement, the Commission feels that it would be difficult to reconcile such a requirement with both the principles of general welfare that characterise Swedish society and with those of and gender equality. If a support requirement were introduced, when should it be applicable? A support requirement should not be introduced as a condition for spouses or cohabitees, in either established or newly established relationships, or minor children to be granted . Neither should such a requirement be applicable to foreign nationals who intend to marry or begin to cohabit with a sponsor in . If a support requirement were to be introduced, it should be applied when authorising family reunification to a relative outside the nuclear family, i.e. parents, unmarried persons, adult children and other close relatives. A support requirement shall however not apply when authorising family reunification to the parents of someone who is a minor refugee or otherwise in need of protection and is unaccompanied by an adult. If a support requirement were introduced – what implications should it have? If a support requirement were introduced, adequate support should be considered safeguarded when there is access to stable and regular resources so that the sponsor or the relative does not need to claim publicly funded means-tested financial support to satisfy basic living needs and cover accommodation costs. The Government or the authority it entrusts can issue more detailed regulations governing the requirements for financial capability in different cases. Exemptions from the support requirement If a support requirement is invoked as a condition for granting a relative family reunification, the Commission feels that there should be no exemptions from it. Checking that the support requirement is fulfilled If a support requirement is invoked as a condition, it should only be assessed the first time a relative applies for family reunification. There should be no subsequent reassessment of the requirement leading to the possible revocation of the permit should the requirement not be met. In its interim report, the Commission proposes the incorporation of certain administrative deadlines into the Swedish Aliens Act. Regarding family reunification between third-country nationals, the applicant shall be informed of the final decision in the case within nine month from the date the application was submitted. In its discussions of the Commission's proposals, the Government has taken the initiative to make the provisions independent of nationality. According to the Commission, this will achieve effective and uniform legislation. The Government intends however to incorporate provisions into the Aliens Ordinance instead of, as proposed by the Commission, the Aliens Act. The Commission finds insufficient cause to question such a regulation regarding the issue. The Commission feels that there are no grounds for additional amendments regarding the administration of applications. The Commission makes the following assessment regarding decision reviews. Concerning decisions on refusal of entry or expulsion, the rejection of an application, or revocation of a permit, the provisions in the new Aliens Act are basically in line with the requirements laid down in the Family re- unification directive concerning the right to mount a legal challenge. With regard to the fact that current practice involves a principle right to family reunification for members of the nuclear family, the Commission feels that the number of permits is not going to rise for these categories, notwithstanding the proposed constitutional amendments. The amendments proposed by the Commission to the conditions for regarding parents and adult children will however, according to the Commission, lead to an increase in immigration. Regarding the 'close relative other than parents and adult children', for example siblings, grandparents, aunts and uncles, the Commission believes its proposals will lead to a slight increase in the number of people able to fulfil the conditions for in compared to the current situation. All in all, however, this increase is not anticipated to involve more than just a small group of people. In accordance with the committee directives, the Commission has tasked an external firm of consultants to estimate the economic effects of the various proposals regarding the immigration of relatives. The proposed amendments will, as mentioned previously, have an impact on the number of permits authorised for parents, adult children and other close relatives outside the nuclear family. The immigration of relatives in the older age groups is expected to rise in particularly. According to the assessment in the consultants' report, there will be a perennial rise in the number of immigrant relatives of 800 per year should the Commission's proposals be implemented without the introduction of a support requirement. With a support requirement (aimed at both un- established relationships and relatives outside the nuclear family), it is felt that the number of immigrant relatives will perennially decrease by about 1,650 persons per year compared to the current level. This decrease will, it is felt, primarily concern unestablished relationships, i.e. mostly people of working age. An alternative without a support requirement will involve, according to the report, an expected deficit in public finances of about million a year for three years. The annual deficit will thereafter decrease to about million. With a support requirement (aimed at both unestablished relationships and relatives outside the nuclear family), the annual deficit is expected to amount to about million during the first three years and thereafter about million a year. The assessments in the report do not seem unreasonable. If one ignores expected revenue (which is included in the consultants' estimate) and only look at the expected costs, the results will be different. The perennial costs per year would be just over million and the annual cost in the first three years would be about million. It should be pointed out, however, that the cost assessment of the Commission's proposals is associated with several rough estimates and uncertainty factors and should there- fore be seen as a rough forecast. In accordance with Government directives, the Commission has also submitted proposals for alternatives regarding an amendment to the regulations governing the immigration of relatives. One alternative, according to the Commission, is to not make any amendments at all to the current regulations governing relatives outside the nuclear family. Another option is to make a small-scale amendment regarding parents so that only parents who are single and the 'last link' (i.e. has all his or her relatives in ) will be granted in . A further option would be to allow parent couples to be granted if they have all their relatives already in . Regarding adult children, an alternative might be to retain the joint household requirement but to grant to adult children in addition to this if there is a relationship of dependence with the parents. Finally, another alternative might be that other close relatives can obtain in exceptional circumstances even if they have not been part of a joint household. The Commission has assessed the costs involved in each of the alternatives. The cost for each alternative is deemed to be lower than the cost for the Commission's proposals. lag om ändring i utlänningslagen (2005:716) Härigenom föreskrivs i fråga om utlänningslagen (2005:716) dels att 5 kap. 3, 8, 16-18 §§ skall ha följande lydelse, dels att det i lagen skall införas tre nya paragrafer, 5 kap. 3 a, 3 b och 17 a §§, av följande lydelse. Lydelse enligt SFS 2005:716 Uppehållstillstånd på grund av anknytning Uppehållstillstånd får ges till 1.en utlänning som är make eller sambo till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bosättning iSverige, om makarna eller sam- borna stadigvarande sammanbott utomlands, 2.ett utländskt barn som är ogift samt är eller har varit hemmavarande barn till någon som är bosatt eller som har be- viljats uppehållstillstånd för bo- sättning i , 3.ett utländskt barn som är ogift och som adopterats eller som avses bli adopterat av någon som för Uppehållstillstånd skall, om inte annat anges i 17 a §, ges till 1.en utlänning som är make eller sambo till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bosättning 2.ett utländskt barn som är ogift och barn till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bosättning iSverige eller till hans eller hennes make eller sambo, 3.ett utländskt barn som är ogift och som adopterats eller som avses bli adopterat av någon som för fortfarande är bosatt eller som fortfarande är bosatt eller som för bosättning i , om för bosättning i , om barnet inte omfattas av 2 och barnet inte omfattas av 2 och – har meddelats eller avses komma att meddelas av svensk komma att meddelas av svensk – gäller i enligt lagen – gäller i enligt lagen – gäller i enligt lagen – gäller i enligt lagen ventionen om skydd av barn och ventionen om skydd av barn och 4. en utlänning som på något 4. en utlänning som är förälder annat sätt än som avses under 1–3 till ett ogift utländskt barn som är är nära anhörig till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats övrigt om barnet vid ankomsten uppehållstillstånd för bosättning i till var skild från båda , om han eller hon har in- sina föräldrar eller från någon gått i samma hushåll som den annan vuxen person som får anses personen och det föreligger ett sär- ha trätt i föräldrarnas ställe, eller om barnet lämnats ensam efter släktingarna som förelåg redan i stycket 2 eller 3 får beviljas endast efter medgivande också av den inte åberopas om denne har del i vårdnaden av barnet. delas enligt denna paragraf skall ha en giltighetstid . 5. en utlänning som är make eller sambo till någon som är bo- satt eller som har beviljats uppe- hållstillstånd för bosättning i , utan att makarna eller samborna stadigvarande samman- bott utomlands, om förhållandet framstår som seriöst och inte sär- skilda skäl talar mot att tillstånd ges, 6.en utlänning som har för av- sikt att ingå äktenskap eller inleda ett samboförhållande med en per- son som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bo- sättning i , om förhållan- det framstår som seriöst och inte särskilda skäl talar mot att till- stånd ges, 7.en utlänning som skall utöva umgänge, som inte är av begrän- sad omfattning, med ett i bosatt barn, och 8.en utlänning som har svenskt ursprung eller som har vistats i med uppe- hållstillstånd. När det finns synnerliga skäl får uppehållstillstånd också i andra fall än som avses i första stycket beviljas en utlänning som 1.är adopterad i i vuxen ålder, 2.är anhörig till en utlänning som är flykting eller skyddsbehöv- ande i övrigt, eller 3.på annat sätt har särskild anknytning till . När en ansökan om uppehållstillstånd grundas på ett beslut om adoption som har meddelats av svensk domstol, skall den anknyt- ning som har uppkommit genom beslutet godtas i ärendet om uppehållstillstånd. Uppehållstillstånd får ges till 1. en utlänning som har för av- sikt att ingå äktenskap eller inleda ett samboförhållande med en per- son som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bo- sättning i , om förhållan- det framstår som seriöst och inte särskilda skäl talar mot att till- stånd ges, 2. en utlänning som i andra fall än som avses i 3 a § är för- älder eller är ogift barn till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bosättning i , om det före- ligger ett beroendeförhållande mellan dem (och om utlänning- ens försörjning är tryggad), 3. en utlänning som på något annat sätt är nära anhörig till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehållstillstånd för bo- sättning i , om det före- ligger synnerliga skäl (och om ut- länningens försörjning är tryggad), 4. en utlänning som skall utöva umgänge, som inte är av begrän- sad omfattning, med ett i bosatt barn, och 5. en utlänning som har svenskt ursprung eller som har vistats i med uppe- hållstillstånd. Uppehållstillstånd skall ges till ett ogift barn till en sådan ut- länning som avses under första stycket 1 och gälla som beviljats för utlänningen. När det finns synnerliga skäl får uppehållstillstånd också i andra fall än som avses i första och andra stycket beviljas en ut- länning som 1.är adopterad i i vuxen ålder, 2.är anhörig till en utlänning som är flykting eller skyddsbehöv- ande i övrigt, eller 3.på annat sätt har särskild anknytning till . Uppehållstillstånd till barn enligt andra stycket får beviljas endast efter medgivande också av den förälder till vilken anknyt- ning inte åberopas om denne har del i vårdnaden av barnet. (Försörjningen skall anses tryggad om det finns tillgång till stabila och regelbundna försörj- ningsmedel så att varken ut- länningen eller den som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehålls- tillstånd för bosättning inte be- höver ta i anspråk behovsprövat ekonomiskt stöd av allmänna medel för att tillgodose grund- läggande behov för livsuppehället och bostadskostnaden. Regeringen eller den myndig- het som regeringen bestämmer meddelar närmare föreskrifter om kravet på försörjning.) Vad som i detta kapitel sägs om uppehållstillstånd till utlänning som är eller har för avsikt att bli sambo till någon som är bosatt eller som har beviljats uppehålls- tillstånd för bosättning skall också gälla utlänning som är eller avser att bli sambo till en medborgare i EES-stat eller som har uppehållstillstånd i eller till en person som har ställning som varaktigt bosatt i EU-stat och uppehållstillstånd i . Ett uppehållstillstånd som be- viljas enligt 3 § första stycket 5 eller 6 skall vid första besluts- tillfället vara tidsbegränsat. Det- samma gäller när uppehållstill- stånd i ett sådant fall beviljas ut- länningens barn. Om makarna inte stadig- varande sammanbott utomlands skall ett uppehållstillstånd som beviljas en make enligt 3 § första stycket 1 vid första beslutstillfället vara tidsbegränsat med en giltig- hetstid . Även ett uppehållstillstånd som beviljas enligt 3 a § första stycket 1 eller andra stycket skall vid första beslutstillfället vara tidsbegränsat. En utlänning som med stöd av 8 § har beviljats ett tidsbegränsat uppehållstillstånd på grund av familjeanknytning får beviljas ett nytt tidsbegränsat eller permanent uppehållstillstånd på den grunden endast om förhållandet består. En utlänning som har familje- En utlänning som har familje- anknytning enligt 3 § första anknytning enligt 3 § första stycket 5 eller 6 och som har haft stycket 1 eller 3 a § första stycket 1 eller andra stycket och som har får ges ett permanent stånd får ges ett per- särskilda skäl, får permanent uppehållstillstånd ges före två- det finns särskilda skäl, får per- före tvåårsperiodens slut. Har ett förhållande upphört får uppehållstillstånd ändå ges, om 1.utlänningen har särskild anknytning till , 2.förhållandet har upphört främst på grund av att i förhållandet utlänningen, eller utlänningens barn, utsatts för våld eller för annan allvarlig kränkning av sin frihet eller frid, eller 3. andra starka skäl talar för att utlänningen skall ges fortsatt uppehållstillstånd.