A/HRC/41/44/Add.1 generous minimum requirements imposed by European Union standards for a three-year period. The changes detract from the more altruistic objectives that the Government set for itself before the amendment of the Aliens Act. While the temporary identity checks were discontinued in May 2017 and temporary border controls were removed in May 2018, as a result of the legislative reform, the number of people seeking asylum in Sweden decreased significantly.60 53. While acknowledging the efforts made by the Government in the aftermath of the 2015 migration crisis and in the absence of a joint European response, the Independent Expert expresses concern at the long-term implications of such restrictive measures for people seeking protection. As these measures are due to be reviewed in 2019, it is essential that they remain temporary, and are lifted. In light of the current migration context and the climate of heightened racist and xenophobic discourse against migrants and refugees in Europe, including in Sweden (CERD/C/SWE/22-23, paras. 10–11), it is essential that the State remain a leader and role model in advancing human rights-based international solidarity by providing safe and legal opportunities for asylum seekers and refugees. 54. During the 2015 migration crisis, in order to respond to the massive flux of new arrivals of refugees and asylum seekers, the Government deducted in-country refugee costs from the budget allocated to foreign development and humanitarian aid. Even though the deductions were made in accordance with OECD Development Assistance Committee rules, were due to an exceptional situation and were kept to a maximum of 30 per cent of the Swedish foreign aid budget in 2016, funding for in-country refugees should be budgeted and accounted for separately from the foreign aid budget. 55. While welcoming the choice of Sweden not to use its development cooperation and foreign aid as leverage to pressure other countries to take back migrants and refugees, the Independent Expert expresses serious concern at reports of forced returns of some asylum seekers and migrants originating from war-torn countries like Afghanistan. The people whose asylum applications have been denied may face the danger of continuing violence and a high risk of retaliation for having left. Such practices, often based on bilateral agreements (such as the memorandum of understanding with Afghanistan) 61 and on individualized assessment, 62 are incompatible with human rights-based international solidarity. Forced returns to countries where there is an imminent risk of danger for asylum seekers and their relatives should never be permitted. 56. The Independent Expert also learned more about the very strict family reunification policy. Indeed, even though a person is granted a residence permit or receives protection status as a refugee, family reunification remains uncertain. A person receiving protection status with subsidiary protection, such as an unaccompanied minor, has little chance of benefiting from family reunification in Sweden unless that person is granted a permanent residence permit, a process that can take up to several years. The Independent Expert expresses concern at these rules, especially regarding the strictness of family reunification processes for people recognized as refugees. Such rules should be brought into line with the right to family life, which becomes particularly important and essential for refugees who have fled from their own countries. Integrating a human rights-based approach in family reunification processes for refugees should be recognized as a good practice that helps to advance the goal of human rights-based international solidarity. 57. Interlocutors brought to the attention of the Independent Expert the challenges relating to unaccompanied minors arriving in Sweden, especially during the second half of 2015. While most of these children and young adults receive a residence permit, some may not be granted authorization to stay in the country and may be forced to return to their country of origin, after an assessment of the conditions that that particular child would face upon her or his arrival in the country of origin. Authorities also informed the Independent Expert that unaccompanied children can sometimes “disappear” during the asylum process. 60 61 62 14 Council of Europe, “Report by Nils Muižnieks, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, following his visit to Sweden from 2 to 6 October 2017”, 16 February 2018, p. 6. See Sweden, “Agreement between Sweden and Afghanistan on readmission”, 26 October 2016. Information shared by relevant authorities.