Gör om, gör rätt! Om judikalisering och migrationsdomstolens tillkomst
Sammanfattning: This thesis examines the reasons behind the Swedish migration policy reform which led to a replacement of the Aliens Appeal Board by the Migration Court. This introduced a two-party procedure, oral hearings and enhanced transparency. It was designed to guarantee the rule of law and to thwart political arbitrariness.
The transfer of power from representative institutions to judiciaries is referred to as judicialization, and the Migration Courts may be considered a typical example of this phenomenon. However, this can be questioned. The straggling nature of the term implies everything and anything unless cautiously defined. This essay portrays the most dominate underlying ideas, categorizes them accordingly to agency/structure theory and then applies them to the reform process. It is evident that the explicit reasons behind engendering the Migration Courts are supported by less prominent incentives. Thus not only legal security and efficiency provoked the reform. Politicians wanted to delegate "hot potatoes" to the judiciaries. Forceful efforts to harmonize law within the EU have had a great impact, supported by the common assumption that legal rights, rather than political resolution, protect the privileges of citizens. The closure of the Aliens Appeal Board could also be considered as symbolic policy change in order to legitimize executed politics.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)