sou · H9B354 · 2021-07-02 00:00:00 — handläggs de flesta medborgarskapsärenden av , men några länsstyrelser handlägger vissa anmälningsärenden. Utred- ningen föreslår att alla anmälningsärenden ska prövas av Migrations- verket. Detta motiveras av att antalet krav i anmälningsärenden före- slås öka såväl genom de förslag som utredningen föreslår i detta betänkande som i delbetänkandet Krav på kunskaper i svenska och samhällskunskap för svenskt medborgarskap (SOU 2021:2). Kravens karaktär bedöms innebära att handläggningen av anmälningsärenden blir mera omfattande. Prövningen blir mer mångfacetterad jämfört med , vilket ökar behovet av en sammanhållen rättsbildning. En sammanhållen rättsbildning kan lättare uppnås om anmälningsären- dena handläggs av en myndighet. Utökade möjligheter att avslå en ansökan om befrielse från svenskt medborgarskap i syfte att motverka hedersrelaterat våld och förtryck Utredningen föreslår att bestämmelserna om befrielse från svenskt medborgarskap i medborgarskapslagen ska utökas med villkor om att det för barns befrielse ska krävas dels att befrielsen inte bedöms stå i strid med barnets bästa, dels samtycke av barn som har fyllt . Vid bedömningen av om en befrielse står i strid med barnets bästa ska hänsyn tas till barnets åsikter utifrån barnets ålder och mog- nad, även då inte samtycke krävs. Det vill säga att även åsikter hos barn som är ska beaktas utifrån barnets ålder och mognad. För barn som är varaktigt förhindrade att lämna samtycke på grund av sjukdom eller på grund av något annat liknande förhål- lande, ska samtycke inte krävas. Hinder kan vara fysisk eller psykisk sjukdom, resultatet av en sådan sjukdom, eller en omfattande intel- lektuell funktionsnedsättning. Hindret ska kunna styrkas med t.ex. läkarintyg. Syftet med bestämmelserna är att stärka barns rättigheter i ärenden om befrielse från svenskt medborgarskap och öka möjligheterna för att avslå en ansökan om befrielse från svenskt med- borgarskap för att bl.a. motverka hedersrelaterat våld eller tvång. Eftersom hot, våld och tvång och andra otillbörliga förfaranden inte endast träffar barn föreslås att en ansökan om befrielse om svenskt medborgarskap ska kunna vägras också vuxna, om det finns anled- ning att anta att sökanden inte själv vill befrias från sitt svenska med- borgarskap. Förslaget i denna del syftar till att skydda den som t.ex. hotas eller tvingas till att göra en ansökan om befrielse från sitt svenska medborgarskap eller den vars ansökan t.ex. förfalskas. För- slaget omfattar såväl den som har hemvist i , som den som har hemvist utomlands. För den som har hemvist i ska det fortsatt kunna vara möjligt att avslå ansökan om befrielse om det annars finns särskilda skäl för det. Som ytterligare ett led i att skydda individens svenska medbor- garskap lämnar utredningen förslag på att ett beslut om befrielse ska kunna återkallas om det fanns hinder mot bifall till ansökan om befrielse för beslutet och inte särskilda skäl talar emot återkallelse. Hindret mot bifall kan t.ex. vara att sökanden tvingades eller hotades till att skriva under ansökan, eller att en person utsatts för annat otillbörligt förfarande. Det vill säga omständigheter som om de hade varit kända då ansökan om befrielse prövades hade resulterat i ett avslag på ansökan. Uttrycket ”inte särskilda skäl talar emot” innefattar t.ex. den situa- tionen att det vid prövningen av om ett beslut om befrielse ska åter- kallas visar sig att personen bedöms utgöra ett hot mot säkerhet eller att han eller hon deltagit i en organisation som begår eller har begått terroristhandlingar. Ett beslut om återkallelse föreslås gälla från den dag då beslutet om befrielse från svenskt medborgarskap fick laga kraft. This report contains the committee’s analyses, assessments and pro- posals regarding the issues of whether further measures are required to limit the occurrence of statelessness; whether the time for acqui- sition of citizenship through notification should be adjusted; whether a requirement of an honest lifestyle should be introduced in order to acquire citizenship following notification; and whether the possi- bilities to reject an application for relinquishment of Swedish citizen- ship should be increased. It is proposed that the presented proposals enter into force on 1 January 2023 and be regulated in the Swedish Citizenship Act (2001:82) and the Citizenship Ordinance (2001:218). Presented below is a summary of the committee’s proposals. Further measures to limit the occurrence of statelessness Automatic acquisition of Swedish citizenship by stateless children born in has been charged with investigating whether auto- matic acquisition of citizenship should be introduced for stateless children born in who have a parent who has permanent resi- dence status and also otherwise a connection to . The com- mittee has concluded that such a system should not be introduced. This is due to the fact that a system involving automatic acqui- sition will necessarily involve both the and the , which would have the consequence that the processing cannot take place as promptly and smoothly as is desir- able and that the system would involve high costs. It is also difficult to design a system which addresses “the correct stateless children”, i.e. those who become stateless over time and not, for example, chil- dren of parents with citizenship in and the who can acquire the parents’ citizenship through registration or notification to the home country authority. Another reason why the committee does not propose a system of automatic acquisition is that statistics show that the number of children who are registered as stateless at birth in is no longer as high some year or years after the birth. A significant proportion of the children registered as stateless at birth are no longer stateless, probably due to them acquir- ing citizenship within a few years after birth, when, for example, paternity has been established or a new investigation provides sup- port for the child being a citizen of a certain country. In order nevertheless to provide an assessment basis, the commit- tee has produced a proposal as to what a system of automatic acqui- sition of Swedish citizenship might look like. makes the assessment that the basis should be that a child born stateless in to a parent with permanent status and who resides in the country should acquire Swedish citizenship at birth. The com- mittee makes the assessment that the should be responsible for decisions regarding registration of Swedish citizen- ship and that, in such matters, the should be able to request an opinion from the , unless such is not necessary, regarding the questions of whether the child’s parents have permanent status in and of whether the child is stateless. further believes that the should assist the with the assessment of statelessness and verification of the parents’ permanent status. considers that it is also important that the and the be in agreement regarding the principles on the assessment of stateless- ness. To ensure that the committee’s assessments are as clear as possible, the report contains a statutory proposal corresponding to the aforesaid and the introduction of a new item regarding the acqui- sition of Swedish citizenship in sec. 2 of the Citizenship Act. The report also contains assessments regarding data protection, appeals and the economic consequences of such a system. Amendments to the provisions regarding acquisition of citizenship following notification, regarding those who have reached the age of 18 but not 21 proposes that the current requirement of from the age of 15 in order to acquire citizenship for stateless persons aged 18 to 21 (sec. 8, first paragraph, subsec. 2 of the Citizenship Act) be supplemented with a rule which allows for the acquisition of citizenship if the stateless person has resided here in for the past five years or during a total of ten years. The changes are aimed at ensuring that the provisions correspond to ’s convention commitments and that the requirement shall apply equally to all stateless young people who apply for citizenship, irrespective of age. Under the current provisions, the period require- ment is, for example, six years for those who apply when aged 19 and five years for those who apply when aged 18. As a consequence of the proposal, a stateless child who is resident in after the age of 15 will also be able to acquire citizenship following notification, even if his or her custodial guardian has not contributed to the acquisition of citizenship pursuant to sec. 7 of the Citizenship Act, which is currently not possible. also proposes that the requirement for a person possessing foreign citizenship (sec. 8, first paragraph, subsec. 2 of the Citizenship Act) be amended so that is no longer required once the alien has reached the age of 13, and instead it should be required that he or she has resided in the country for the past five years. The proposal means that the foreign citizen who has been resident in since the age of 13 is given the possibility to acquire citizenship following notification, if the custodial guardian has, for whatever reason, declined to assist the child acquiring Swedish citizenship, which is currently not possible. The proposal also means that the unjustified difference in period which currently arises, depending on when notification is submitted, and which is mentioned in the paragraph above regarding stateless young people, is eliminated. Issues regarding honest lifestyle Most aliens become Swedish citizens by applying for citizenship (naturalisation). Naturalisation matters include a requirement of an honest lifestyle. For some, however, there is an easier way to become a Swedish citizen: following notification. The provisions regarding acquisition of citizenship upon notification are primarily suitable to children or young adults, but also others, e.g. certain Nordic citizens and those who have previously been Swedish citizens and wish to regain their citizenship. In most notification matters there is no requirement of an honest lifestyle. proposes that the provisions regarding acquisition of Swedish citizenship upon notification be supplemented with various requirements which may disqualify the person to whom the notification relates from acquiring citizenship in order to prevent, e.g. a person who has committed serious offences from acquiring citizenship. proposes that the acquisition of citizenship follow- ing notification shall not be possible if the person to whom the notification relates is reasonably suspected, or has been convicted, of serious criminal behaviour. The expression “serious criminal be- haviour” has been chosen to include serious offences as well as repeated criminal behaviour. has considered various ways of identifying what should be regarded as serious offences and has concluded that, in the context, serious offences means offences which carry a minimum of four years imprisonment as the maximum penalty on the penal scale. With such a definition of serious offences, the following offences, for example, would be included: •human exploitation (Chapter 4, sec. 1 b, the Penal Code); •unlawful persecution (Chapter 4, sec. 4, the Penal Code); •aggravated unlawful threats (Chapter 4, sec. 5, the Penal Code); •sexual exploitation of children (Chapter 6, sec. 5, the Penal Code); •outrageous conduct towards a public servant (Chapter 17, sec. 2, second paragraph, the Penal Code); and •perverting the course of (Chap. 17, sec. 10, the Penal Code). The enumerated offences all carry four years’ imprisonment as the maximum penalty, but obviously all offences that carry a higher maxi- mum penalty, such as murder, aggravated assault, rape and human trafficking, are included. It is not merely offences set forth in the Penal Code that may be deemed to constitute serious offences; also offences in other statutes, e.g. aggravated narcotics offences that are governed by the Narcotics Penalties Act (1968:64), as well as aggra- vated weapons offences governed by the Weapons Act (1996:67). Insofar as it transpires, during the assessment, that the person to whom the notification relates has committed offences in other coun- tries, it shall be possible to take this factor into consideration to a corresponding extent as proposed when considering the requirement regarding criminal behaviour in . makes the assessment that it is likely to be regarded as contrary to the general sense of to grant Swedish citizen- ship to a person who admittedly has not committed such an offence as the committee has defined as serious but has repeatedly commit- ted offences carrying a lower maximum penalty. It is therefore pro- posed that repeated criminal behaviour may, under certain conditions, lead to a person being disqualified from being able to acquire Swedish citizenship following notification. In light of the fact that notifications involve a quicker and simpler assessment, the committee has proposed that a verdict as well as an already reasonable suspicion of such serious criminality as referred to here shall suffice to disqualify from the acquisition of citizenship following notification. It is proposed that the requirement regarding serious criminal behaviour not be specified in terms of time. In practice, this means that a person who, on any occasion, has been convicted of a serious offence will be excluded from the possibility of being granted Swedish citizenship following notification. Threats to ’s security or public security proposes that the provisions in the Citizenship Act governing acquisition of Swedish citizenship following notification be supplemented with a requirement that acquisition shall not be possible if the person to whom the notification relates is deemed to constitute a threat to ’s security or public security. The com- mittee proposes that the assessment which is made in notification matters be made in the same way as the assessment of the require- ment of an honest lifestyle in naturalisation matters and that the processing of notification matters shall take place in the same way as when assessing the requirement of honest lifestyle in naturalisation matters, i.e. through a referral to the Security . further proposes that notification matters where the Security have proposed that notification be rejected for reasons relating to ’s security or public security, shall be classi- fied as security matters and might therefore be appealed to the Govern- ment. in, or controlling influence over, among others, terrorist organisations proposes that the provisions of the Citizenship Act regarding acquisition of Swedish citizenship following notification be supplemented with a requirement that acquisition shall not be possible if the person to whom the notification relates has been in, or had a controlling influence over, an organisation or group which is or has been involved in acts of terrorism or systematic, extensive and aggravated assaults on other human beings. The requirement is worded in accordance with the case law from the Migration Court of Appeal with respect to the assessment of the requirement of an honest lifestyle in naturalisation matters. Accord- ing to the Migration Court of Appeal, organisations or groups in- volved in acts of terrorism or systematic, extensive and aggravated assaults on other human beings means, for example, organisations whose activities include assaults such as torture, murder and non- judicial executions. It is proposed that the assessment of the require- ment shall take place in the same as currently takes place in naturalisation matters. Who will be covered by the requirements? It is proposed that the committee’s proposals regarding serious criminal behaviour, threats to ’s security or public security as well as activity in or controlling influence over, among others, ter- rorist organisations shall apply to everyone covered by notification for the acquisition of Swedish citizenship who has reached the age of 15, with exception of those who may not be included in light of ’s convention commitments. With reference to ’s international obligations, it is therefor proposed that requirement shall not cover stateless persons born in , nor citizens of , , or who have acquired Swedish citizenship through notification pursuant to secs. 18 and 19 of the Citizenship Act or their unmarried children who acquire citizenship pursuant to sec. 10 of the Citizenship Act. In order for the proposed requirements to become meaningful, the processing authority must be aware of the identity of the person to whom the notification relates. Accordingly, the committee proposes that the provisions of the Citizenship Act regarding acquisition follow- ing notification be supplemented with a requirement regarding identity. It is proposed that the requirement be worded in the same way as in sec. 12, second paragraph of the Citizenship Act, i.e. that the party applying, or the custodial guardian of the party applying, must show probable cause that the stated identity is correct. proposes that, in order to finance the assessment of the new requirements, the fee set forth in the Citizenship Ordinance regarding notification matters pursuant to secs. 7–9 of the Citizen- ship Act be increased from to . It is also proposed that a fee of be introduced for notifications pursuant to a transitional provision, in respect of which no fee is currently charged. proposes that the Citizenship Ordinance be supple- mented with a new provision in order to clarify that the may disclose information to, and obtain information from, the Authority, the Security and the Debt Enforce- ment Agency when assessing the requirement of an honest lifestyle in naturalisation matters. A similar provision is also proposed to clarify that the may disclose information to, and obtain information from, the Authority and the Security when assessing notification matters of any person who is reasonably suspected, or has been convicted, of serious criminal behaviour, is judged to constitute a threat to ’s security or public security, or has been in, or had a controlling influence over, an organi- sation or group which is or has been involved in acts of terrorism or systematic, extensive and aggravated assaults on other human beings. The time of acquisition of citizenship in notification matters proposes that the assessment of whether the condi- tions for acquisition of citizenship through notification are satisfied in the Citizenship Act shall be made based on the circumstances pertaining at the time of the decision in the matter, instead of the situation today which is based on the circumstances at the time of the notification. It is further proposed that the acquisition of Swedish citizenship shall, in future, be established as on the date of the decision. Currently, a person who satisfies the formal requirements at the time of the notification is granted citizenship and the Swedish Migra- tion Agency has no possibility to take into account whether the cir- cumstances have changed since the notification date. Accordingly, the is precluded from rejecting notification for citizenship even if one of the conditions is no longer satisfied at the time of the decision. This means that if, for example, a permanent permit of the person to whom the notification relates has been withdrawn after the notification date, the is precluded from rejecting notification for citizenship. An assessment of whether the conditions are satisfied which is made based on the conditions pertaining at the time of the decision in the matter will correspond to the situation applicable in, e.g. natu- ralisation matters and upon application of the Aliens Act (2005:716). In accordance therewith, it is proposed that the acquisition of Swedish citizenship be established on the date of the decision. It is proposed that the amendments shall take place through the phrase “acquisition through notification” in secs. 6–10 of the Citizen- ship Act being replaced by the phrase “acquisition after notification”. It is not proposed that notification matters concerning Nordic citizens (secs. 18 and 19 of the Citizenship Act) be covered by the proposed changed principle for the assessment of notification matters and that the acquisition of Swedish citizenship shall be established at the decision date; this is because such an arrangement is not deemed to be possible in light of the treaty between , , , and regarding citizenship (SÖ 2012:6). A single processing authority for all citizenship issues At present, most citizenship matters are processed by the , but several county administrative boards process certain notification matters. proposes that all notifi- cation matters be assessed by the . This is justified by the fact that it is proposed that the number of require- ments in notification matters be increased and due to the proposals that the committee makes in this report and in the secondary report entitled Requirements of knowledge in Swedish and civics for Swedish citizenship (SOU 2021:2). It is believed that the nature of the require- ments means that the processing of notification matters will become more extensive. The assessment will become more multifaceted than at present, which will increase the need for cohesive administration of . Cohesive administration of can be achieved more easily if the notification matters are processed by a single authority. Increased possibilities to reject an application to relinquish Swedish citizenship with the aim of counteracting honour-related violence and oppression proposes that the provisions governing relinquish- ment of Swedish citizenship as set forth in the Citizenship Act be expanded to include provisions that relinquishment in respect of a child will require that the relinquishment is not deemed to conflict with the best interests of the child, as well as consent of a child who has reached the age of 12. When assessing whether relinquishment conflicts with the best interests of the child, consideration shall be given to the child’s views based on the child’s age and maturity, even if consent is not required. This means that the views of children who are younger than 12 shall also be taken into account, based on the child’s age and maturity. Consent shall not be required with respect to a child who is permanently prevented from providing consent due to illness or any other similar circumstance. Impediments may com- prise physical or mental illness, the result of such illness, or serious intellectual functional impediment. It must be possible to substan- tiate the impediment through a doctor’s certificate. The aim of the provisions is to strengthen the rights of children in matters regarding relinquishment of Swedish citizenship and to increase the possibilities for the to reject an application to relinquish Swedish citizenship, in order, among other things, to counteract honour-related violence or duress. Since threats, violence and duress and other impermissible acts do not merely occur with respect to children, it is proposed that an application for relinquishment of Swedish citizenship might also be refused in respect of an adult, if there is reason to believe that the applicant does not personally wish to relinquish her or his Swedish citizenship. In this regard, the proposal is aimed at protecting the person who, for example, is threatened or forced to make an applica- tion regarding relinquishment of Swedish citizenship, or whose appli- cation is, for example, a forgery. The proposal includes both a person who is resident in and a person resident abroad. For a person resident in , it shall continue to be possible to reject an appli- cation for relinquishment if there are other particular reasons therefor.