Swedish parliament adopts “snitch law” against migrants

On Monday 15th June, the Swedish Parliament adopted the “snitch law”, a proposal to oblige some public sector workers to report undocumented people to the police and immigration authorities. 

According to the proposal (here’s an overview), the Swedish government will oblige the following governmental agencies in Sweden to automatically report undocumented people to the police as they come in contact with them: the Public Employment Service, Social Insurance Agency, Prison and Probation Service, Enforcement Agency, Pensions Agency and Tax Agency. The Swedish police may then pass on the information to the Migration Agency or the Security Service. It also proposes that the Swedish Economic Crime Authority and the Prosecution Authority should be obliged to provide information upon request from an enforcement agency. 

The proposal foresees exemptions for health services, schools and social services, but does not effectively protect people accessing those services. 

A few examples of what this law could lead to in real life – despite the above exemptions (based on research conducted by Swedish researchers: 

• In Sweden, midwives must forward information about a newborn child to the Swedish Tax Agency so that the child can be registered. With the Swedish Tax Agency being obliged to report an undocumented parent or child, it becomes clear that the exemption for healthcare professionals does not constitute real protection. The information may still end up with the authorities who are obliged to liaise with immigration authorities. 
•  Staff at the Social Insurance Agency raised concerns that every phone conversation or meeting with clients could potentially give rise to “side information”, i.e. information that does not concern their ongoing case, which they must still report to the police. 
• The Swedish Prison and Probation Service and the Swedish Public Employment Service must work with their clients in confidence. But if they receive information about someone who does not have a residence permit, they would be required to share this and thus undermining trust of their clients. 

NOTES TO THE EDITORS

• More information about the original plan and the public inquiry that led to this proposal (past PICUM’s press releases).
• More information about reporting obligations and how they are regulated in other European countries in this PICUM’s factsheet.

QUOTES

Louise Bonneau, Advocacy Officer, PICUM

“Today’s vote marks a serious setback for human rights in Sweden. Reporting obligations imposed on public agencies create a climate of fear that harms not only undocumented people, but everyone who depends on these institutions – and the civil servants who work within them. The so-called exemptions for healthcare, schools and social services don’t offer sufficient protection: in practice, information will flow between service providers, agencies, and immigration authorities. We will not accept this as the final word. We stand with our partners in continuing to fight for the repeal of this law and the protection of human rights for everyone in Sweden.”

Jacob Lind, International migration researcher, Malmö University

“Today’s vote will have devastating consequences for undocumented migrants who will be further pushed into the margins of society as their access to rights is restricted. It directly violates children’s rights (that is Swedish law since 2020) and targets the integrity and impartiality of state servants. The government is purposefully harming its own reputation and tainting its proud history of efficient state agencies with high public trust only to create a hostile environment for migrants. It is cruel, ineffective policy and opens up the pandoras box of snitching – a trademark of authoritarian states.”

Hannah Laustiola, Director, Médecins du Monde Sweden

“Today marks a sad point in Swedish history, where in spite of the overwhelming public resistance against this law, the Parliament chose to vote for the creation of an informant society. The bill has already had a negative impact, undermining trust and equal access to rights, including healthcare. However, the mobilisation and resistance from civil society has no doubt contributed to improving today’s outcome, as the scope of the original proposal was even wider.”

Jan Willem Goudriaan, General Secretary, European Public Services Union

“If reporting mandates—or ‘snitch laws’—are introduced in public services, people will be afraid to use essential services like hospitals, care systems, schools, and public transportation, while putting at risk our members working in those sectors. We must also remind governments that public services would cease functioning without migrant workers in Sweden and many EU Member States. What we need is not a new witch hunt that forces workers to act as informants, but strong public services, properly staffed migration and reception systems,  investment through an approach that strengthens trust, rights, and inclusion.”

“There is nothing to be gained from a reporting mandate that seeks to deport undocumented migrants who have committed no crime. This ‘snitch law’ threatens the fundamental right to asylum and the principle of non-refoulement, while fuelling a climate of suspicion, fear, and racism—including within the public sector workplace. It merely legitimises the far-right, who are all too happy to see their wildest dreams of mass surveillance, detention, and deportation come true at the expense of public service ethics.