Könsstympning som uteslutningsgrund? - En undersökning av förhållandet mellan flyktingskap och uteslutning

Sammanfattning: In this essay, the relationship between refugee protection and exclusion is examined when a person has committed female genital mutilation/cutting before he or she came to Sweden. The question to be answered is whether female genital mutilation/cutting can constitute a serious non-political crime. The Swedish Migration Court has considered female genital mutilation/cutting as a serious non-political crime in two cases, which have been granted leave to appeal to the Migration Court of Appeal. The two cases are not described in detail in the essay, but can however be said to express the need for research. The essay is divided into one more descriptive part and one more analytical part. In order to determine the legal situation material such as the law, legislative history, common practice and doctrine have been used. The question of exclusion from refugee protection becomes relevant only after the person has been found to be a refugee. Both the refugee definition and the exclusion grounds are based on international law. In the essay, it is stated that a person is excluded from being considered a refugee if there is particular reason to assume that he or she has committed a serious non-political crime outside Sweden before he or she came here. Such crimes mentioned to be serious non-political crimes are rape, murder and armed robbery. In the essay, it is stated that the conception of justice of female genital mutilation/cutting is similar to that of rape and gross assault, which may indicate that female genital mutilation/cutting is a serious non-political crime and ground for exclusion. In the analytical part of the essay, some problematic arguments are presented, including how social and cultural values ​​can be of importance in the case of female genital mutilation/cutting as a ground for exclusion.