2026-06-092025/26:SfU30 · p.3SfUMigration & social insurance
The right to public counsel
Right to public legal counsel in asylum cases
What's at stake: The decision affects how much professional legal help asylum seekers - who are often in a vulnerable situation - can access to present their grounds for protection, and the balance between public-finance considerations and legal certainty in the asylum process.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether the right to public legal counsel in expulsion cases should be tightened and adapted to the EU's minimum legal level, including strict limits on compensable advisory time at the Migration Agency, or whether the current, more extensive rules should remain in place.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee considers that the rules on public counsel need to be tightened and adapted to the EU's minimum legal level, and judges that the proposed arrangement creates an effective and appropriate system while maintaining legal certainty, while public-finance considerations also argue against going beyond what is required. The committee therefore rejects the motions calling for the current rules to remain or for access to public counsel during the asylum process to be further safeguarded.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 4 (S, V, C, MP)
The reservation (S, V, C, MP) considers the government's strict limits on compensable advisory time at the Migration Agency to be a dramatic deterioration, since the asylum process is complex and professional help is essential for individuals to present their grounds for protection correctly. The Council on Legislation criticizes the proposal and warns that the strict time limits conflict with good legal practice and risk leaving people in need without support, and several consultation bodies warn of weakened legal certainty. The reservation wants the current rules to remain, extended to also cover cases under the asylum procedures regulation and the asylum and migration management regulation, with the government instructed to investigate and come back with such a proposal.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
V–
S–
MP–
C–
L–
KD–
M–
SD–
YesNoAbstainAbsent
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 4 by S, V, C, MP.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
The plan's stance / Actual vote
AI
Vote
Confidence
Evidence
Vown reservation
–
No 0/20/0/1
Sown reservation
–
No 0/106/0/0
MPown reservation
–
No 0/18/0/0
Cown reservation
–
No 0/23/0/1
L
–
Yes 16/0/0/0
KD
–
Yes 18/0/0/1
M
–
Yes 65/0/0/1
SD
–
Yes 68/0/0/2
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions
2025/26:4153 by Ida Karkiainen et al. (S) motion 2 and
2025/26:4157 by Niels Paarup-Petersen et al. (C) motion 4.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna
2025/26:4153 av Ida Karkiainen m.fl. (S) yrkande 2 och
2025/26:4157 av Niels Paarup-Petersen m.fl. (C) yrkande 4.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag approved the government's proposal which, among other things, means that permanent residence permits for persons in need of protection and persons who are permanently residing in Sweden and their relatives are removed.
The proposal is part of the work to adapt the Swedish regulatory framework for granting international protection and the asylum procedure to the minimum level of EU law. The aim of the adaptation is to create better conditions for integration and to reduce exclusion by reducing asylum-related immigration.
The legislative amendments enter into force on 12 July 2026 with certain transitional provisions, except for the amendments in the new Reception Act which enter into force on 2 October 2026.
Counter-proposals
The counter-proposal wants permanent residence permits to remain the main rule in Sweden and rejects the government's proposal to phase them out. (S, V, C, MP) — Reservation 4
Motion 2025/26:4153 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:262 Utmönstring av permanent uppehållstillstånd och anpassning av svensk rätt till EU:s migrations- och asylpakt av Ida Karkiainen m.fl. (S)
Motion 2025/26:4157 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:262 Utmönstring av permanent uppehållstillstånd och anpassning av svensk rätt till EU:s migrations- och asylpakt av Niels Paarup-Petersen m.fl. (C)
Motion 2025/26:4170 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:262 Utmönstring av permanent uppehållstillstånd och anpassning av svensk rätt till EU:s migrations- och asylpakt av Malcolm Momodou Jallow m.fl. (-)
Motion 2025/26:4174 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:262 Utmönstring av permanent uppehållstillstånd och anpassning av svensk rätt till EU:s migrations- och asylpakt av Annika Hirvonen m.fl. (MP)
Motion 2025/26:4183 — med anledning av prop. 2025/26:262 Utmönstring av permanent uppehållstillstånd och anpassning av svensk rätt till EU:s migrations- och asylpakt av Tony Haddou m.fl. (V)
Proposition 2025/26:262 — Utmönstring av permanent uppehållstillstånd och anpassning av svensk rätt till EU:s migrations- och asylpakt