The Danish Parliament voted on 3 June 2021 to amend the Danish Aliens Act, enabling the forcible removal of asylum seekers outside of Europe for processing, placing those exercising their fundamental right to seek asylum in countries with fewer resources, and abdicating Denmark of responsibility for vulnerable individuals and families.

The law will come into effect should Denmark secure an agreement with a third country to transfer asylum seekers to.

Rasmus Stoklund, an immigration spokesperson for the Danish government, stated that he hoped the new law would send the message that asylum seekers “aren’t welcome in Denmark”.

Denmark already imposes one of the strictest immigration policies in the European Union, with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen working towards a goal of zero asylum seeker arrivals in Denmark. From 2016 to 2019 Denmark did not accept new refugees. In March 2021, Denmark revoked the residence visas of 94 refugees, stating that the situation in Damascus had improved sufficiently to remove their refugee status – despite the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees stating that any improvements in Syria are not stable nor durable enough to deny protection for refugees.

These moves have led to fears that Denmark, often hailed as a liberal, progressive state, has shifted towards right-wing nationalist policies. The introduction of the latest law to relocate and process asylum seekers outside of Europe only confirms such concerns and has been met with heavy criticism from Human Rights organisations, the UN, and the European Commission.

UNDERMINING THE RIGHT TO SEEK ASYLUM

Those expressing concerns over the Danish Aliens Act agree that it has the effect of undermining the fundamental right to seek asylum, enshrined in article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and reinforced by the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol (the Refugee Convention). Denmark was the first country to sign this Convention.

Filippo Grandi, UN High Commissioner for Refugees, stated that the new law evades responsibility, and is contrary to the spirit of the 1951 Refugee Convention. He adds that the UNHCR has repeatedly noted their objections to the Danish government and offered “pragmatic alternatives”.

Gillian Triggs, a UNHCR assistant high commissioner, has stated that the new law “demonises and punishes” those seeking safety and protection, and will “put lives at risk”.

Adalbert Jahnz, spokesman for the European Commission, has commented that “external processing of asylum claims raises fundamental questions about both the access to asylum procedures and effective access to protection”.

Jahnz also questions the compatibility of the new law with Denmark’s international obligations, as under EU law external processing is not permitted.

RESPONSIBILITY-SHARING: AN UNLIKELY PROMISE?

In 2018 the UN General Assembly affirmed the Global Compact for Refugees – a framework for more equitable responsibility-sharing. The Compact is non-binding, but supposedly represents the “political will and ambition” of the international community.

Denmark stated that they are committed to the implementation of the Compact – yet their latest laws and policies suggest otherwise. We have witnessed a wave of regressive policies in recent years in the UK, Germany, the USA, and across the globe, despite affirmation of the Compact. The continuing attempt to shift responsibility for people in need of protection to other States is deeply concerning.

As commented by Grandi, 90% of the world’s refugees live in either developing or the least developed countries with limited resources, yet they still step up to meet their international obligations and responsibilities. Denmark, and all wealthy, economically developed nations, must ensure that they are doing the utmost to protect those seeking asylum.

Erin graduated from the University of Glasgow and is currently studying a masters in Human Rights Law at the University of Strathclyde. She is particularly interested in using human rights law to tackle climate change at an international and local level, and the effect of climate change on vulnerable groups.

Linkedin