Stockholm, Sweden — Sweden will continue forcibly deporting Somali nationals and aims to replicate the model with other countries, Migration Minister Johan Forssell said, despite a growing political row over Swedish funds tied to returns cooperation.
Swedish media, citing police figures, reported that Somali authorities accepted 25 people forcibly removed from Sweden by November, including 14 deported after criminal convictions. The figures show forced removals rising from six in 2023 to 29 last year.
Forssell stated Sweden has “no plans” to cancel the cooperation, arguing it delivers results. In remarks published by Sweden’s public broadcaster, Forssell’s comments addressed weeks of scrutiny over what Swedish outlets have termed the “Somalia money.”
For the Swedish government, the challenge is practical. Deportation orders require a country of origin to confirm nationality and accept returnees. Without such cooperation, removals stall, and legal decisions remain unenforced.
Stockholm notes it also supports return and reintegration capacity through international partners, including the UN migration agency. IOM describes its approach as “safe, dignified and rights-based” return and reintegration in its policy framework.
The Swedish debate, however, has shifted beyond the principle of deportation to the process: how Sweden structured the cooperation, exactly what was funded, and the documented safeguards.
Money row
The controversy centres on two funding streams that Swedish media and opposition politicians have grouped under the phrase “Somalia money.”
In late October, SVT reported that Sweden paid approximately five million kronor outside the aid budget to support deportations to Somalia, citing a Dagens Nyheter investigation.
SVT’s account of the government-funded support for deportations triggered calls for parliamentary scrutiny from opposition parties.
A larger component involves roughly 100 million kronor in development funds. According to Sweden’s parliament, this funding shifted toward arrangements closer to Somali state structures than previous setups.
In a written response to lawmakers in October, Minister for International Development Cooperation and Foreign Trade Benjamin Dousa stated that development cooperation can serve as foreign-policy leverage to improve migration partnerships, including returns.
He noted Sweden has not entered a formal agreement linking aid to readmissions, describing instead a “shared understanding” that Somalia should accept its citizens under international principles.
Forssell and other ministers have rejected allegations of wrongdoing, stating Sweden has tightened anti-corruption controls.
KU scrutiny
The dispute has moved from headlines to Sweden’s constitutional oversight committee.
In a complaint to the Committee on the Constitution (KU), Social Democrat Morgan Johansson alleged Sweden paid at least 105 million kronor during 2024–2025. This includes 100 million from the aid budget and five million routed via IOM from a Justice Ministry allocation for migration policy.
The complaint alleges that a Sida-UNDP arrangement earmarked 11.5 million kronor for Somalia’s prime minister’s office, and that the five million kronor routed via IOM went to the same office.
Forssell has denied claims, cited in Swedish reporting, that funds went to “ghost workers” or high-ranking officials. He stated Sweden received reporting on outputs and results, though details remain unreleased.
Somalia’s governance record complicates the issue.
Transparency International scored Somalia 9 out of 100 and ranked it 179th out of 180 in its 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index. While the ranking does not prove misuse in this specific programme, it contextualizes the demand for documentary clarity regarding financial transfers and deportations.
Somalia pressures
Members of the Somali community in Sweden told Somalia Today that Somalia’s prime minister’s office has facilitated deportations by instructing Somalia’s embassy in Stockholm to issue clearance documents for individuals identified for removal. Several described this reported role as a betrayal.
Somalia’s embassy in Stockholm and the prime minister’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
For Somalia, returns from Europe add to the pressure on migration systems already managing return flows from the Gulf and neighbouring countries, alongside internal displacement.
Somalia’s National Bureau of Statistics described return migration as a major policy area involving multiple institutions and international partners in its Migration Statistics Report 2024.
A tension exists between these frameworks. IOM’s “rights-based” language emphasizes humanitarian standards, while Sweden’s agenda prioritizes enforcement.
The intersection of these logics through funding invites scrutiny regarding the financial architecture behind the deportations.
For now, Forssell indicated Sweden seeks more arrangements similar to the Somalia cooperation, including by conditioning aid more tightly on returns. Parliament will now examine the evidence the government provides.