(SOMALIA) Somalia denies that it struck a secret deportation deal with Sweden and has repeated that stance in several statements as of October 8, 2025, pushing back against Swedish media reports that claimed development funds were tied to Somalia’s acceptance of deported nationals. The Prime Minister’s Office called the claims “baseless, misleading, and unfounded,” stressing that any cooperation on returns or development is handled transparently and in line with international law.
Officials also said that all aid flows go through established partners, including multilateral channels, and not through undisclosed political arrangements.
Allegations from Swedish media
Reports by Swedish public broadcaster Ekot and other outlets alleged that, in December 2023, Sweden redirected 100 million kronor (about $10 million) in Swedish aid to projects linked to the Somali Prime Minister’s Office. According to those reports, the money was part of a confidential understanding that Somalia would accept deported Somali nationals, including people denied asylum or individuals convicted of crimes in Sweden.
Journalists cited internal documents and testimonies suggesting both governments sought to keep the arrangement quiet and that the funds boosted the Somali Prime Minister’s political reach.
Somalia’s rebuttal
Somalia’s government flatly rejects those claims. Key points from its response:
- There is no secret deportation deal, no conditional aid, and no side agreement outside normal diplomatic channels.
- Migration cooperation is handled openly and only through official agreements.
- Development aid is audited and managed via recognized mechanisms such as the World Bank and UN agencies.
- Somalia reaffirmed its duty to protect the rights of its citizens abroad and said any returns must meet international standards on safety and dignity.
Political fallout in Sweden
Swedish authorities have faced sharp domestic debate since the media reports:
- Opposition parties and several aid experts questioned the alleged arrangement, pointing to corruption risks in channeling funds directly to political offices.
- Critics noted Somalia’s low ranking on global corruption indices and called for stronger oversight or a parliamentary inquiry to clarify whether aid conditions were linked to removals.
- The controversy intensified after a year of disputes over disbursement, during which Sweden’s development agency SIDA reportedly objected to the arrangement.
- Somalia expelled Sweden’s aid chief in May 2025 following further clashes over control and transparency.
What Sweden says about returns
While Sweden has not publicly confirmed a secret pact, the government signaled a harder line on returns policy.
- Sweden’s Minister for International Development Cooperation, Benjamin Dousa, defended the broader idea of using aid to support migration goals, arguing that it can be reasonable to use development assistance to encourage countries to take back their nationals who have final deportation orders.
- Swedish authorities also confirmed that deportations of Somali nationals have increased over the past year, with at least 28 people removed since the reported understanding took shape.
For Somali families in Sweden, these developments bring real anxiety. Some fear sudden enforcement following asylum denials. Others worry about relatives with old criminal cases who could face removal after long stays. The lack of a jointly published agreement leaves many guessing which rules apply.
According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, such disputes often leave affected communities caught between fast-moving political debates and slow, complex legal processes.
Somalia’s position and diplomatic stakes
Somalia has maintained a consistent public message:
- There is no secret deportation deal and no exchange of Sweden aid for removals.
- Any return of citizens must respect due process.
- Any development financing must meet strict accountability standards.
- Press reports drawing a link between aid and returns misrepresent how Somalia handles partnerships.
This messaging aims to:
- Calm Somalis abroad who fear forced returns under unclear terms.
- Assert that Mogadishu will not accept deportation flights outside proper procedures.
Diplomatic friction remains. Swedish media continue to cite documents and sources suggesting a confidential understanding, while Somali officials insist those accounts are wrong. The rift has fueled a broader debate in Stockholm over tying aid to migration enforcement and whether such links undermine transparency goals.
In Mogadishu, the government faces pressure to show that foreign funding supports public services, not political patronage, and that any migration cooperation respects international law.
Practical implications for people affected
- People with final removal orders in Sweden may face quicker enforcement if Sweden prioritizes returns to Somalia. Legal advice remains essential for anyone with an appeal pending or new evidence to submit.
- Families should:
- Keep copies of identity papers and court decisions.
- Maintain up-to-date contact with lawyers or accredited advisors.
- Travelers should verify current documentation rules for voluntary return or forced removal processes, including travel documents and reception arrangements upon arrival.
For official guidance on Swedish removal procedures, including detention, appeals, and voluntary return options, consult the Swedish Migration Agency:
https://www.migrationsverket.se/English/Private-individuals/Detention-and-appeals/If-your-application-is-rejected.html
This page explains steps after a rejection and how authorities carry out deportations.
Broader policy debate
The broader policy question—whether rich countries should link aid to migration cooperation—has divided lawmakers across Europe for years.
- Advocates argue:
- Incentives help enforce final decisions.
- Linking aid can keep the asylum system credible.
- Critics warn:
- Conditioning aid can weaken institutions in partner countries.
- It can increase corruption risks.
The Somalia–Sweden dispute is a sharp test of these arguments, not only for its ethical stakes but also for its real effect on people whose lives can change with one removal decision.
Current status and next steps
As of October 8, 2025, two core facts remain in tension:
- Somalia maintains there is no secret or conditional deportation deal with Sweden.
- Swedish media and some officials continue to claim a confidential understanding exists, pointing to redirected funds and rising removals.
No independent, public document from either government has settled the question. That gap keeps pressure on both sides: Stockholm to show clean processes and Mogadishu to uphold its declared standards.
For those at risk of removal, focus on immediate, practical steps:
- Keep legal deadlines.
- Collect records that support protection claims.
- Seek qualified legal help early.
Community groups in Sweden can also help by sharing clear information and assisting families to plan for different outcomes, including voluntary return options where appropriate.
On the government side, publishing agreements, clarifying aid channels, and sharing return protocols would reduce fear and close space for rumor. Whether this dispute fades or deepens will depend largely on what both countries release publicly. If Somalia and Sweden publish clear terms for cooperation — including oversight and rights safeguards — they could ease tensions and provide a template for other bilateral return efforts. If not, the political cost may rise, and families will continue to live with uncertainty while the debate over aid and migration grinds on.
This Article in a Nutshell
Somalia has publicly denied Swedish media allegations that Sweden secretly tied development aid to accepting deported Somali nationals. Swedish outlets, citing documents and testimonies, reported that in December 2023 Sweden redirected 100 million kronor (around $10 million) to projects linked to Somalia’s Prime Minister’s Office as part of a confidential understanding to facilitate returns. Mogadishu called the claims baseless and stressed that aid is channeled through recognized partners—such as the World Bank and UN agencies—and that migration cooperation follows official agreements and international law. The controversy provoked debate in Sweden over corruption risks and transparency, with at least 28 Somalis deported since the reported arrangement. Both governments face pressure to publish clear terms and oversight mechanisms; affected individuals are advised to seek legal counsel and preserve documentation.
