Children’s Rights to Asylum in the Swedish Migration Court of Appeal

Abstract

Children’s rights to asylum have led to political controversies in a number of countries in recent years. This article focuses on the translation of nearly universally recognised children’s rights principles into a domestic practice of immigration control, and explores how legal norms regarding children’s rights to asylum have developed in the Swedish Migration Court of Appeal 2006–2013. Court decisions are analysed with a focus on the meanings given to the best interests of the child, how this is given weight against state interests of immigration control, and how children’s interests are given normative force. It is only in a small minority of cases in which the Best Interests Principle (bip) in fact does have a decisive normative force in granting residence permits and the meanings and use of children’s interests in court argument makes evident that the bip enables both the granting and denial of residence permits. The bip is doing normative work in double directions.