The Local put our readers' questions to Åsa Holmes, head of the Migration Agency's citizenship unit in Gothenburg, as well as a few questions of our own.
As some details still remain unclear, such as how the agency's case officers will handle requests for deferrals on decisions to allow applicants time to prove language or civics knowledge, we have decided to publish the full text of the interview as a Q&A to allow readers to interpret the answers for themselves.
Could you tell me a little bit about how you're processing applications at the moment, specifically the backlog of cases from before the new rules came into effect on June 6th?
We haven't really changed anything. We process them according to our established priority order. So, once the case officer needs new cases, we divide them out, and the older cases and the cases covered by a court order [request to conclude] are given priority at the moment.
We've started seeing some rejections coming in after June 6th, and a lot of them seem to be because the applicants don't meet the eight-year residency requirement. Are you using that as the first check at the moment to be able to process those cases fairly easily and quickly?
It's part of our assessment. They have to meet that criterion, and some of the applicants don't meet that criterion. We do also have other applications that are rejected for other reasons, so it's not the only reason.
There are a lot of rumours online with people assuming that you're prioritising rejecting those applications right now that don't meet the residency requirement, because those are easy to process, but from what I understand from you, that's not the case? You're going through them as before, is that correct?
Yes. The caseworkers are working with all their cases, and some cases, because of the new requirements, require more information from the applicant, so they've also started working with that – asking them to send in more information, so we can assess their application.
All the applications are different so we need to have the correct information in an individual case before we decide on it, and one of those indicators is that some don't meet the requirement for residency any longer.
I see, so it's not that somebody sits down with a pile of all the applications they have and they go "OK, which ones don't meet the residency requirement? Reject, reject, reject…"?
No no. They always have to work on all their cases.
Thank you for clarifying that. A lot of our readers are in the queue and understandably have a lot of questions, so I promised I would put some of their questions to you.
Say for example that I have a pending application from before June 6th, and I have now lived in Sweden seven years and 11 months, so I don't meet the residency requirement. But my case officer doesn't get around to my application until next month, which brings me over the eight-year threshold. Do I now get to become a citizen, assuming I meet all other requirements?
When we start handling your case, that's when we look at if you fulfil the requirements. So that's the simple answer to that question.
I've also got a question about the civics tests. Invitations have gone out to a certain number of people who will be sitting the exam on August 15th. How did you decide who got to take the first test?
The case workers had to look through their applications to see how far they've been processed and they were selected on the basis of that. Then we sent out invitations where we could see that one of the next steps in the assessment of the application would be this test, if that makes sense.
Do you know when the next test after the first one will be, or is it all in the hands of the Swedish Council for Higher Education (UHR)?
Yes, that's in the hands of UHR. The first test is in August and then we will see when the next opportunity for the civics test will be, and the Swedish language tests are also being rolled out. The latest information that we have is autumn 2027.
For the next civics test, will that still be you sending out invitations to people too?
Yes. When we assess the application and see that this applicant should do this test, because they can't show in any other way that they meet the requirement, then we send that to the applicant and they book themselves in for the test.
Will the Migration Agency send information to those who need to supplement their applications, or is there anything they should be doing in the meantime?
No, they should wait until we contact them, because we have a dialogue with all the applicants. We need different information depending on how much information we already got from the application when they submitted it, so they should wait until they're allocated a case officer. The case officer will review their application and then request the information needed to process it.
We've spoken to you many times about whether or not you can request to put your application on hold until you meet the requirements, but I'm going to keep asking, because there still seems to be a lack of clarity and conflicting information out there.
The Migration Agency's director general, Maria Mindhammar, told my colleague in an interview recently that the confusion may stem from you and the other unit managers having a fair amount of independence in how you handle things. Would you agree with that?
No, we really try to process cases in the same way. I would say it's a terminology thing, this "putting on hold". We say that the applicant can ask for a deferral if we request additional information – give them more time to produce whatever we're asking them to submit, which to you would maybe seem like a "pause", but it's not, it's a formal way of asking for more time.
We look at it on a case-by-case basis: is the amount of time that the person is asking for to provide this additional information reasonable? Of course, at the moment this becomes more interesting, and we understand that the applicants are interested in this question, because it impacts quite a lot how they can maybe learn Swedish or whatever they need to do, but it's up to the applicant in every case to ask for a deferral for more time.
We will look at the reasons behind it, but it also has to be a reasonable request. The case officer will look at it, and if they need more advice they will always consult their team leaders or head of department.
But we're not "pausing" any applications so that people meet requirements for the future. If you need more time, a couple of weeks to get the information to us, then of course you will be given that if it's reasonable.
So if you meet all the requirements but you don't have any proof yet of your civics and language skills, would it be a reasonable request then to say, can I defer this until I'm able to take the language test next year?
The language test is not rolled out yet, so the Tisus test is an interim solution to prove your language skills, if you don't have any other documents – secondary or primary school or Komvux or evidence like that – to show. Folkuniversitetet's Swedex could also be another way to show that you have these skills until the tests are rolled out.
But the civics test we'll have to look at on a case-by-case basis. There is no simple solution to that kind of test if you haven't attended secondary school, Komvux or the likes of that to show that you have the knowledge that's needed. So the civics test is a different matter. If it comes to the civics test only, you would have to have a dialogue with your case officer.
Sorry to be pressing this point, but I don't understand why it has to be on a case-by-case basis.
Because there are so many parameters when we assess an application. It becomes very complicated to say a general rule, because then an applicant is going to say "well, this doesn't apply to me" – no, because it really is on a case-by-case basis.
But say you have two people who meet all the other requirements, it's just that they don't have any evidence of their civics knowledge yet, because they haven't taken Komvux or sat this test or anything. What's an example of something that could then decide whether one person gets to defer and one person doesn't?
I don't have an example of that at the moment. We rarely go into examples because it's individual, because people can draw conclusions from it that might not be correct, so we try to not go into that territory.
So basically, if you don't have a way of showing that you speak Swedish, you should try as quickly as possible to obtain some sort of documentation that proves that – and you shouldn't sit back and wait for the language tests to be organised next year?
It depends on where you're at, but if you're already studying Swedish and working towards that, you should look at our website and see what the requirements are and try to work to fulfil the requirements. There are different ways of doing it, not just waiting for these tests that are going to be rolled out over a couple of years, so it's going to take some time.
Have there been any internal PMs sent out about how to process these cases?
We've had staff training of course, but deferrals are nothing new. We've always had people asking for more time to submit a passport or whatever, so that's not new, we always assess that on a case-by-case basis. And the other information on how to handle the priority order, we've already got a widely known priority order. We're quite a few staff, we're 300 approximately, so there will be guidelines on how to process the applications.
If deferrals are granted on a case-by-case basis, as you say, then surely there must have been some staff training on what factors to take into account when deciding whether to defer an application or not?
No, because it's so different. It can be that someone needs a passport and they're travelling to the other side of the world to get that – there are so many different factors because we've got 105,000 individuals in the queue and they are all different.
We do encourage people to ask for a deferral and reason with us why they should have a bit more time to produce whatever they need to produce. So there's no harm in asking, but I can't give you more advice than that.
But I'm not talking about passports, I'm talking specifically about the cases where somebody meets all the requirements for citizenship, it is just that they don't have documentation of their language skills or civic skills, because the tests aren't available yet. So someone who says "I speak Swedish fluently, I just don't have any physical paperwork for it" – has there been any staff training on the factors to take into account for deciding whether to defer someone's application in those cases?
No, not in depth. We've touched on it, that people might ask for deferrals according to this, and if case workers get this question, they should seek advice about how to handle it. But we don't have any wide information around that. But it will probably come the more we start working with the cases in accordance with the new legislation, so we may be able to answer more in a couple of months regarding this. Also, when we know more about the civics tests and when they're going to be rolled out. It's just too many question marks at the moment.
But there are different ways to prove your Swedish skills if you don't currently have documentation, so read up on it on the website, that's my advice.
Maria Mindhammar also said that on this occasion she might need to get her citizenship units together to make sure that everyone is on the same page. Do you agree this is necessary, or do you feel that everything is already clear?
Well, not everything is 100 percent clear, because it's new. But we are working together on this change, we have had a group that has worked through the legislation and seen what we need to do differently, and all managers are connected to that group. We have management meetings and try to work together so that we work as closely as possible across the regions.
How long would it take for the Migration Agency to start applying transitional rules if a new centre-left government were to introduce them?
It's difficult to speculate. We're working according to the legislation we have now, and if there is new legislation we're just going to have to be flexible and make changes. That's what we always do and we always try to be as efficient as possible and adapt.
We've had a question from readers about people who are rejected because they don't meet the new residency requirement, but who will presumably be eligible for citizenship again at some point – does the Migration Agency keep hold of their documentation, like Säpo approval or the 11-page questionnaire they had to fill out, or will they have to go through the entire process again from scratch?
Every application is considered on new information, and it needs to be up to date, so yes, they would have to go through the process and submit everything again. I’m not 100 percent sure, but if you pass the civics test, I think it will be valid for next time you apply.
Let's end on another question from a reader. If you could change just one thing to dramatically reduce waiting times, what would it be?
It's not for me to say, so I can't comment on that. We always work to improve and be as efficient as possible, but also that the handling of the cases is done properly, so we don't want to rush. We work with staff training, because the deeper the knowledge the case officers have, the more efficient they will be.
There are lots of things I could wish for, but that's as a private person, and as a government employee it's my job to make it as efficient as possible with the resources that we have, and I think we do that quite well, actually. I can assure the public that we're really working hard day by day and prioritise according to our priority order.
Comments (9)