| ▲ | advisedwang 4 hours ago |
| The UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Article 34 says: > The Contracting States shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalization of refugees. They shall in particular make every effort to expedite naturalization proceedings and to reduce as far as possible the charges and costs of such proceedings. Sweden is a signatory and seems to be in non-compliance. |
|
| ▲ | torben-friis 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| About 2% of Sweden's population are refugees (!). For contrast, for the US the figure is 0.1% And it's not like they are in a border with an active war zone. |
| |
| ▲ | advisedwang 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | So? The convention says nothing about requiring a border with a conflict and nothing about a cap. | | |
| ▲ | torben-friis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | So I think calling them out for not helping enough is going to involve a lot of glass houses. | |
| ▲ | zulux 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | As I understand, asylum seekers are to stop at the first safe country. They don't get to pick wherever they want. | | |
| ▲ | advisedwang 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Each state is independently obligated not to return a refugee to a place of danger. The convention allows countries to make agreements to deport refugees to safe 3rd parties or stop refugees from transiting (like the EU has with Turkey). If Sweden finds another place for these refugees that's legal (and then that country has the obligation to eventually naturalize them). Sweden is just not supposed to keep people in a permanent temporary state. (Also, many asylum seekers just get on a plane, and for them Sweden may well be their first stop) |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | bonzini 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| My understanding is that giving permanent residence means not naturalizing, and therefore this is a step towards compliance. |
| |
| ▲ | advisedwang 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm not familiar with the Swedish system, but in the 2 immigration systems I am familiar with, permanent residence is a step you must take before naturalizing. | | |
| ▲ | bonzini 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Is one of those in the EU? | | |
| ▲ | advisedwang 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, although a quick search shows France also operates on this principal. Is there any counterexamples you are thinking of? | | |
| ▲ | bonzini 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Italy has a long term residence card that is valid for 10 years, and renewable indefinitely, but the conditions for renew are absolutely not comparable to a green card for example. Just go out of the EU for a year and it's no more. https://www.poliziadistato.it/articolo/ec-residence-permit-f... This was adopted by Italy in 2007. So while I am not sure about it I suspect it's the same for all EU countries, since immigration papers are mostly governed by EU regulations and directives. What is your source for France having mandatory permanent residency prior to naturalization (unless it's permanent in the sense of renewable indefinitely)? Edit: indeed, this is a bill for adopting rules laid out in the EU directive on immigration and asylum. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | IlikeMadison 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Economic migrants are not refugees, try again. |
| |
