B. Establishments for foreign nationals deprived of their liberty under aliens legislation; (Read full CPT report)
18. There had been no major changes to the legal framework for immigration detention since the 2015 visit. 23 As previously, the maximum period of detention of an adult foreign national deprived of his/her liberty under aliens legislation was 12 months,24 except if he/she was expelled by a court decision because of a crime (as a rule after having served a prison sentence in Sweden) in which case there was no absolute time-limit for detention.25 Detention orders were reviewed every two weeks except for refusal of entry or expulsion orders, which were reviewed within 2 months from the date on which enforcement of the order had begun.
19. The delegation visited, for the first time, two closed migration detention centres (förvar) run by the Swedish Migration Agency, in Åstorp and Ljungbyhed. Åstorp Detention Centre was located in a converted office and storage facility in an industr ia lestate on the town’s suburbs. Opened in 2011, it had the capacity of 80 places26 and was, at the time of the 2021 visit, accommodating 35 adult foreign nationals including five women. Ljungbyhed Detention Centre, opened in 2019 on the premises of a former air force base fire station, had the capacity of 4027 and was, at the time of the visit, accommodating fourteen foreign nationals, all of them male adults.
20. It is to be stressed that the delegation did not receive any allegations of ill-treatment by staff of the Åstorp and Ljungbyhed Detention Centres. Further, the delegation received no allegations and found no other indications of violence between detained foreign nationals. Most of the foreign nationals interviewed by the delegation indicated that the overall atmosphere in both centres was
relaxed.
21. Material conditions in the two detention centres visited were of a high standard. Rooms were
bright, airy and clean, suitably equipped (bunk beds with full bedding, lockers and wardrobes) and
sufficiently spacious (e.g. rooms measuring 18 to 30 m² and accommodating up to three foreign
nationals in Åstorp and up to four in Ljungbyhed). Detained foreign nationals could move freely
within their living units and had unrestricted access to communal toilets and showers, as well as
washing machines in which they could wash their own clothes (the bedding was washed by the
establishments). Food, which was varied and reflecting the detained foreign nationals’ dietary needs,
was served three times a day and there was an extra night snack at 10 p.m. as well as tea/coffee
available at all times; furthermore, various snacks and drinks were available for sale from vending
machines.28 There was no problem with access to adapted clothing (for those foreign nationals in
need of it) and personal hygiene items.
22. As regards activities, both centres had well-furnished and equipped day/recreational areas
with sofas, tables, chairs, TV/DVD and radio sets, some books and magazines in different langua ges
and a range of board/computer games, as well as computers with the Internet.29 Further, there was
access to fitness equipment30 and occasionally staff offered group activities such as bingo, cooking,
painting, drawing, English classes, table football and table tennis competitions, etc. However, access to outdoor exercise (in sufficiently spacious and well-equipped yards with
some exercise equipment and basketball hoops) was only granted for up to 2 hours per day. In the
CPT’s view, detained foreign nationals should in principle have free access to an outdoor area
throughout the day, i.e. at least two hours per day. The Committee recommends that the Swedis h
authorities take steps at Åstorp and Ljungbyhed Detention Centres (and, as applicable, in othe r
detention centres) to increase detained foreign nationals’ daily entitlement to outdoor exercise
in the light of the above remarks.
More generally, the CPT wishes to stress once again that the regime for persons deprived of
their liberty pursuant to aliens legislation should reflect the nature of their deprivation of liberty, with
limited restrictions in place and a varied offer of activities. The longer the period for which persons
are held,31 the more developed should be the activities which are offered to them. The Committee
recommends that further efforts be made to develop the offer of activities for foreign nationals
who spend prolonged periods at Åstorp and Ljungbyhed Detention Centres (and, as applicable ,
in other detention centres). In particular, they should be offered some work and education/vocational training, preferably allowing them to acquire skills that may prepare
them for reintegration in their countries of origin upon return.
23. Neither of the detention centres visited had its own on-site health-care staff. Instead, pursuant
to agreements between the Swedish Migration Agency and respective local health-care centres,
Åstorp Detention Centre was visited by a nurse from Monday to Friday (between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.)
and Ljungbyhed Detention Centre on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.32 When the nurse was
absent, staff of both detention centres relied on emergency services (Falck). In order to see a doctor (whether a general practitioner or a specialist, including a dentist),
detained foreign nationals had to write an application explaining the reasons for their request (in
Ljungbyhed they were also asked to mark the part of the body where they had pain on a sort of “body
chart”) and hand it to non-medical staff. This meant that the procedure criticised by the Committee
many times in the past33, whereby access to health care was filtered by non-medical staff, continued.
It was thus hardly surprising that several interviewed foreign nationals complained about the lack of
or delays in access to medical care (in particular, specialists). Furthermore, the arrangements in place
remained problematic from the standpoint of the protection of medical confidentiality, also because
prescribed medication (including psychotropic drugs) was distributed to detainees by medically
untrained personnel.
Moreover, despite the CPT’s long-standing recommendation,34 there was still no systematic
medical screening upon arrival at detention centres for foreign nationals. The Committee wishes to
emphasise yet again that carrying out medical screening of all newly-arrived foreign nationals is in
the interests of both detainees and staff, in particular for identifying those at risk of self-harm,
screening for transmissible diseases and the timely recording of any injuries.
In the light of the above remarks, the CPT calls upon the Swedish authorities to take
measures to improve significantly the provision of health care to foreign nationals detained at
Åstorp and Ljungbyhed Detention Centres (and, as applicable, in other detention centres),
paying due attention to medical confidentiality. Urgent steps should be taken to increase the
times of presence of a nurse in both establishments and to improve access to general
practitioners and specialists (including dentists). Further, steps should be taken to ensure that
someone competent to provide first aid (which should include being trained in the application
of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and the use of defibrillators) is always present at both
detention centres whenever the nurse is absent (including at night). The Committee also reiterates its recommendation that all newly arrived detained. foreign nationals benefit from a comprehensive medical screening (including screening for transmissible diseases and for signs of mental disorders) by a doctor or a fully qualified nursereporting to a doctor as soon as possible after their admission.
24. As regards psychiatric and psychological care in particular, the CPT is concerned about
possible mental health issues remaining undetected and/or not being addressed adequately. Given the
numbers of detained foreign nationals transiting through both centres, their personal histories and the
stress incurred by the prospect of deportation and sometimes prolonged detention, many of them
inevitably presented symptoms of post-traumatic stress or other mental disorders (as was also
acknowledged by the staff). In both detention centres visited, access to psychiatric care was in fact limited to emergencies
and psychological assistance was either unavailable (in Ljungbyhed) or only available upon request
and with considerable difficulty (in Åstorp36). The Committee recommends that steps be taken to
ensure adequate access to psychiatric care and psychological assistance for foreign nationals at
Åstorp and Ljungbyhed Detention Centres (and, as applicable, in other detention centres).
25. As for contact with the outside world, foreign nationals detained at both centres had
reasonably good possibilities to receive visits,37 make telephone calls (including with their own
mobile phones) and send and receive letters. Further, detainees were provided with written information (available in a large number of
languages) on their rights, including on the right to ex officio legal assistance (see paragraph 26
below), to appeal and to send confidential complaints to outside bodies.38 If required, access to
(telephone) interpretation could be arranged easily. External monitoring was carried out by staff of the OPCAT Unit (NPM) and, based on a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Swedish Migration Agency, by the Swedish Red Cross. 39
26. Concerning access to a lawyer, the situation had not changed since the previous CPT’s visit.40
According to the Aliens Act, a detained foreign national has the right to a public counsel in cases
concerning the enforcement of a refusal of entry or expulsion order if the alien has been held in
detention for more than three days. The Committee would like to recall once again that detained foreign nationals (whether or not
they are asylum seekers) should – in the same way as other categories of persons deprived of their
liberty – be entitled, as from the outset of their deprivation of liberty, to have access to a lawyer. The
CPT reiterates its recommendation that the relevant legislation be amended so as to ensure that
all persons held under aliens legislation (wherever they are detained) have an effective right of
access to a lawyer as from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty and at all stages of the
proceedings.
27. Both detention centres visited had isolation rooms for placement of persons for reasons of
security (to protect them from harming themselves and to prevent them from harming others).
Conditions in these rooms were on the whole adequate.
However, the CPT has misgivings regarding the whole concept and procedure for placement
of detained foreign nationals in isolation. The placement was decided by the most senior staff member
present at a given moment (usually the “team leader”) and there was no absolute time-limit in the
Aliens Act (apart from the obligation to review the placement decision after 3 days). Likewise, there
seemed to be no procedural safeguards in place such as the right to an oral hearing, to be informed of
the reasons for the placement and to receive the placement decision in writing, to call witnesses and
benefit from legal assistance, etc. While the Committee understands that placement in isolation was
often decided because of the detained person being in an agitated/aggressive/self-aggress i ve
condition (and, in such cases, especially if staff considered that there was a risk of suicide or self-
harm, a nurse was contacted immediately or – in the absence of a nurse a doctor from Falck was
called and asked to come and see the person), the delegation found quite a number of instances where
a detained foreign national had been held in the isolation room for prolonged periods (up to 3weeks).
In the CPT’s view, whenever a person needs to be placed in an isolation room because of
being agitated and/or aggressive to him/herself or others, such a placement should be of the shortest
possible duration i.e. hours rather than days; if a detained person has not calmed down after such a
short period, he/she should be medically assessed with the view to a transfer to an appropriate health –
care facility. If, on the other hand, the placement takes place on de facto disciplinary and/or
administrative grounds (because a detained person has violated the house rules and/or did not get
along with other detainees), this would seem to be contrary to the current Swedish legal framework
and should thus not take place at all. More generally, it should be recalled here that, according to the Committee, any placement in isolation for disciplinary and/or administrative reasons would in any case have to have a legally set time limit (e.g. up to 14 days) and the placement procedure would have to comprise all the safeguards referred to above.
The Committee recommends that the legal framework and the practice of placement of
detained foreign nationals in isolation be reviewed in the light of the above remarks and,
furthermore, be brought into conformity with the standards set out by the CPT in docume nt
CPT/Inf (2011) 28-part2.44 The comments and recommendations made by the Committee in
paragraphs 50 and 51 below are applicable mutatis mutandis.
28. The Committee is concerned by the fact that, despite its long-standing recommendatio n, 45
foreign nationals detained pursuant to aliens legislation could still be held in prisons.46 It appeared
that such a transfer (decided by the Swedish Migration Agency at the Headquarters level in
coordination with the Swedish Prison and Probation Service, Kriminalvården) was sometimes de
facto a form of ultimate measure to deal with “difficult” or “challenging” detainees held in detention
centres. The CPT must stress once again that, in those cases where it is considered necessary to deprive persons of their liberty under the aliens legislation, they should be accommodated in centres specifically designed for that purpose, offering material conditions and a regime appropriate to their legal situation. The Committee calls upon the Swedish authorities put an end to the practice of placing persons detained under aliens legislation in prisons.
