I know this is a bit beside the point of the lecture, but since there seems to be a discussion about this and Swedish migration law is my area I feel that I need to step in.
I’m not sure that I agree with you that this could be based on the interpretations of humanitarian reasons. The misinterpretations of “humanitarian reasons” took place in the 80s and 90s but I believe it was corrected in -96. Between 2006 and 2016 this provision was called distressing circumstances and went far beyond what international conventions demanded. Secondly, it is very rare to be given protection under distressing circumstances, compared to other protection grounds. This is because a person only can be given protection under distressing circumstances/humanitarian reasons when they have been precluded for protection as refugees or from subsidiary protection. Since most people given protection end up in one of these categories I doubt the interpretation of this provision would make any big difference.
I also decided to look this up since I had some trouble believing these numbers. Iraqis are one of the largest migrant groups in Sweden, and are in general considered to be “easy cases” among migration lawyers. According to the statistics of the Swedish migration authorities, 2297 Iraqis applied for asylum in 2009 and 1904 was given protection (http://www.migrationsverket.se/Om-Migrationsverket/Statistik/Oversikter-och-statistik-fran-tidigare-ar.html).
Since this didn’t quite match the 7% I tried to find out where the author of the article got this number from. Turned out to be a bit difficult since his referencing game isn’t on point (if someone else figures it out, I’d be happy to know). This does however get even stranger since one of the articles that he is somewhat referencing to (Toshkov & Haan, The Europanization of asylum policies) instead claims that 25% of the Iraqis that applied for asylum in Sweden in 2009 got protection. In sum, there are lies, damned lies and statistics…