Bedömningen av skäl vid asylärenden : Särskilt om sexuell läggning som förföljelsegrund ; The Assessment of Grounds in Asylum Claims : Particularly Regarding Sexual Orientation as Grounds for Persecution

The asylum investigation is characterised by difficulties in providing sufficient evidence, as it is rarely a possibility for the applicant to submit written evidence supporting their claim. Due to the lack of evidence, asylum investigations are commonly decided on the applicant’s word alone. This sets high demands on the asylum case officer, as it is required that a certain method is applied in order to avoid compromising the Rule of Law and the predictability. In case of a mistake, the asylum seeker could be deported to a country where they are at risk of serious human rights violations. However, the evaluation of the applicant’s statement is primarily determined by a credibility assessment, a model characterised by its uncertainty and subjectivity. The purpose of this essay is therefore to analyse what is required of an asylum seeker, in order to be granted refugee status and a residence permit in Sweden, according to Chapter 4, Section 1, and Chapter 5, Section 1, of the 2005 Aliens Act, when sexual orientation is referred to as the ground for persecution. The first result of this essay is that the burden of proof is placed on the asylum seeker, meaning that they have to make their case probable, as the applicable standard of proof. Regarding the responsibility to investigate, the burden is divided between the asylum case officer and the asylum seeker. The extent of the investigative responsibility differs depending on the nature of the case and to which extent fundamental human rights are implicated. Therefore, the investigative responsibility should be comprehensie in asylum cases based on sexual orientation, as human rights are involved. The second result is on the evaluation of evidence. It can be held that the main rule is the principle of free sifting of evidence, however the evaluation must still be thorough, objective and consistent. Therefore, the Rule of Law is paramount throughout this process. Upon evaluating the evidence, one has to consider both past events and future circumstances, while ...