Swedish immigration agency accused of «Systematically Violating» LGBTQ refugees’ rights

Three lawyers claim Migrationsverket is digging into queer migrants' sex lives without legal representation present, «Last we checked, human rights also apply to refugees in Sweden».

Sweden’s Migration Agency stands accused of trampling over the privacy rights of LGBTQ refugees in its pursuit of revoking residence permits.

Three lawyers have gone public with the allegation in a DN Debatt opinion piece, reported by Omni.

«Systematically Violating That Right»

“All people in Sweden have the right to protection of private life», the lawyers wrote. «Our view is that the Migration Agency is currently systematically violating that right».

The authors are Silas Aliki, Joakim Lundqvist and Jasmine Qazbegi, all practising at Folkets advokatbyrå.

Private Questions, No Lawyer Present

Their central complaint concerns confusion over where the burden of proof lies. According to the lawyers, agency staff fail to grasp the distinction between an asylum case – where the applicant bears the burden of proof and a revocation case, where that burden shifts to the authority itself.

The consequence, they argue, is that LGBTQ people are compelled to answer deeply personal questions during initial interviews without a lawyer in the room and without being informed of their right to remain silent.

DN’s own framing of the piece puts it bluntly: «How do you define your sexual orientation, and how was your child actually conceived?». 

Wider Crackdown Context

The accusation lands amid a broad tightening of Swedish immigration policy. In June 2026, Sweden’s parliament passed a so-called «good behaviour» law permitting authorities to revoke residency permits on grounds including unpaid debts, undeclared work or extremist links, applying retroactively to permits already granted.

The measure drew sharp criticism from human rights groups. Stockholm-based Civil Rights Defenders warned: «The good behaviour law leaves people in uncertainty about what actions or expressions can be used against them»

The Core Dispute

At the heart of the lawyers’ argument is a procedural point: when the state seeks to strip someone of protection already granted, it is the state, not the individual, that must make the case.

By blurring that line, they contend, the agency effectively places LGBTQ refugees back in the position of having to prove their identity all over again, this time without the safeguards that accompany a formal asylum process.

The Migration Agency has not commented in the Omni report.

Sweden has long positioned itself as one of Europe’s most progressive nations on LGBTQ rights, becoming the first country in the world to legalise gender transition by law in 1972. The tension between that reputation and an increasingly restrictive migration regime sits at the centre of this dispute, with the outcome likely to shape how queer asylum seekers are treated across the Nordic region.

Sources: Omni, Dagens Nyheter, Reuters via Yahoo News