Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Judging International Human Rights pp 439–451Cite as

Denmark

Implementation of International Human Rights Decisions in Denmark

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 900 Accesses

Abstract

The Danish implementation of human rights decisions is a complex matter that revolves around three interdependent variables. First of all, human rights obligations derive from a variety of sources that have different status in Danish law, namely obligations under the Council of Europe, the European Union and the United Nations. Second, the obligations can be implemented in different ways. And third, different institutions handle international human rights obligations in different ways. Accordingly, it is a topic with several dimensions. The aim of the article is to provide an overview of these dimensions, despite the complexity.

The starting point of the implementation of decisions rendered under different international instruments is the formal status of the human rights treaties, as well as the power of the decision-making body. The domestic effect of statements of UN treaty bodies differs from that of judgments of European courts, but the difference should not be overestimated as Danish law provides several examples of significant impact of non-binding decisions, statements, etc. Next, the varying legislative implementation of human rights instruments and decisions will be analysed with a view to determining the significance hereof. Finally, practice of different institutions will be taken into account such as the Refugee Board, the Equality Board, the Ombudsman, the National Human Rights Institution, the legislator and the judiciary.

The overall conclusion is that Danish law also in the field of human rights implementation is very pragmatic and goes a very long way to ensuring de facto implementation of Denmark’s human rights obligation as they are reflected in international decisions, whether rendered vis-à-vis Denmark or other countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Denmark has not yet acceded to the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance and will not subscribe to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.

  2. 2.

    Denmark has not accepted Protocol No 12 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

  3. 3.

    Denmark has not accepted individual complaints under the International Covenant on Social and Economic Rights.

  4. 4.

    Betænkning 682/1973, (1973); 15; Matzen (1910), p. 23 and Espersen (1970), p. 165.

  5. 5.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 148, cf 47 ff. ‘Folketingstidende 1991-92 tillæg A’ (1992), sp 5470 f and ‘Folketingstidende 1991-92 tillæg B’ (1992), sp 891 f.

  6. 6.

    Matzen (1900), p. 237.

  7. 7.

    Spiermann (1999), p. 497.

  8. 8.

    Spiermann (1999), pp. 497 and 503.

  9. 9.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 13, 147 and 193.

  10. 10.

    Act No 285 of 29 Apr 1992; cf Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991).

  11. 11.

    Betænkning 1407/2001 (2001) and betænkning 1546/2014 (2014).

  12. 12.

    ECtHR, Sørensen and Rasmussen v Denmark, judgment of 11 Jan 2006, nos 52562/99, and 52620/99 and ‘Lov om beskyttelse mod afskedigelse på grund af foreningsforhold’.

  13. 13.

    ECtHR, Bäcklund v Finland, judgment of 6 July 2010, no 36498/05, and ‘lov nr 483 af 21 maj 2014 om ændring af lov for Grønland om børns retsstilling og arvelov for Grønland’.

  14. 14.

    ECJ, Caner Genc, judgment of 12 Apr 2016, case C-561/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:247, Genc and ‘lov nr 664 af 8 June 2012 om ændring af udlændingeloven’.

  15. 15.

    Berlin (1916), p. 74 and Møller (1925), p. 10 f.

  16. 16.

    Espersen (1970), p. 390, cf 243 (‘korrekturhage’).

  17. 17.

    Espersen (1970), p. 495 (‘en slags nødløsning’).

  18. 18.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 148 (‘en slags sikkerhedsnet’).

  19. 19.

    Department of Justice, ‘Justitsministeriets redegørelse af juli 1972 for visse statsretlige spørgsmål i forbindelse med en dansk tiltrædelse af de Europæiske Fællesskaber’, Nordisk Tidsskrift for International Ret 1971, 80 f (‘en mere formålsbestemt retsanvendelse frem for en ordret fortolkning’).

  20. 20.

    Holm (1981), p. 127 ff. (‘lovens hovedregel bevare[r] sit væsentligste anvendelsesområde’).

  21. 21.

    Holst-Christensen (1989), p. 49 (‘intentioner, som har været væsentlige for lovgivningsmagten, fortsat lader sig realisere’).

  22. 22.

    UfR 1990 13 H (‘udtømmende regulering’).

  23. 23.

    Spiermann (1999), p. 412.

  24. 24.

    UfR 2006 770 H.

  25. 25.

    UfR 2014 3667 H.

  26. 26.

    UfR 1994 536 H.

  27. 27.

    UfR 2000 1201 H, UfR 1996 234 H and perhaps UfR 1994 954 H.

  28. 28.

    UfR 1996 234 H.

  29. 29.

    UfR 2000 1326 H.

  30. 30.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 80.

  31. 31.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 12, 80, 146 and 192 (‘så vidt muligt’).

  32. 32.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 197.

  33. 33.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 149.

  34. 34.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 146.

  35. 35.

    UfR 1996 234 H.

  36. 36.

    ‘Betænkning 1407/2001’ (2001), 307. On the significance of international practice and other sources of interpretation, as well as the distinction between general provisions and political declarations. (‘programerklæringer’), see ‘Betænkning 1407/2001’ (2001), 150 ff. cf ‘Betænkning 1220/1991’ (1991), 147 f. and Betænkning 682/1973 (1973), 45 ff.

  37. 37.

    Melchior (2003), p. 201.

  38. 38.

    Spiermann (2004), p. 171.

  39. 39.

    UfR 2004 1765 H; cf ECtHR, Ciliz v The Netherlands, judgment of 11 July 2000, no 29192/95.

  40. 40.

    Betænkning 1407/2001 (2001), 308 (‘bør … indgå med vægt’). See also Betænkning 1546/2014 (2014)

  41. 41.

    UfR 2005 1265 H (‘Lovgiver har herved foretaget en afvejning af hensynet til en arbejdsgiver, der kræver uniform eller bestemt beklædning, over for hensynet til en ansat, som af religiøse grunde ikke kan opfylde beklædningsreglerne.’).

  42. 42.

    Spiermann (2004), p. 171.

  43. 43.

    UfR 1996 234 H, Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 149.

  44. 44.

    BVerfG, Görgülü, judgment of 14 Oct 2004, 2 BvR 1481/04, section 60.

  45. 45.

    Christoffersen (2009), chapter 5.

  46. 46.

    Other examples are the Independent Police Complaints Authority (use of force) and The Mediation and Complaint-Handling Institution for Responsible Business Conduct (OECD’s guidelines for multinational enterprises).

  47. 47.

    Available online via http://www.ombudsmanden.dk/find/udtalelser/beretningssager/alle_bsager/2015-8/pdf1. Accessed 11 July 2017.

  48. 48.

    See Badse (2013).

  49. 49.

    Available online via http://www.fln.dk/da/Publikationer/Notater.aspx. Accessed 11 July 2017.

  50. 50.

    Available online via http://www.flygtningenaevnet.dk/~/media/FLN/Nyheder/Nyhed12062015.ashx. Accessed 11 July 2017.

  51. 51.

    Christoffersen (2016), p. 279.

  52. 52.

    Available online via http://udln.dk/da/Praksis/familiesammenfoering_andre/Foraldre%20til%20herboende%20mindreaarige%20born/FAM_2014_211.aspx. Accessed 11 July 2017.

  53. 53.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 148.

  54. 54.

    Zahle (2005), p. 428.

  55. 55.

    Olsen (2003), pp. 91–104.

  56. 56.

    Betænkning 1220/1991 (1991), 153.

  57. 57.

    Christoffersen (2014).

References

  • Badse C (2013) The Danish experience: the Danish Institute for Human Rights. In: Wouters J, Meuwissen K (eds) National Human Rights Institutions in Europe – comparative, European and international perspectives. Intersentia, Cambridge, pp 27–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin K (1916) Den Danske Statsforfatningsret – Første del. G.E.C. Gad, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Christoffersen J (2009) Fair balance – a study of proportionality, subsidiarity and primarity in the European Convention on Human Rights. Brill Nijhoff, Leiden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Christoffersen J (2014) Menneskeret – en demokratisk udfordring. Hans Reitzels Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Christoffersen J (2016) Prøvelse af Flygtningenævnets afgørelser. Ugeskrift for Retsvæsen 2016:279–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Espersen O (1970) Indgåelse og Opfyldelse af Traktater. Juristforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm NE (1981) Konventionens praktiske betydning i Danmark. Nordisk Tidsskrift for International Ret 50:118–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Holst-Christensen N (1989) Gælder menneskerrettighederne i Danmark? Juristen 1989:49–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Matzen H (1900) Forelæsninger over Den Positive Folkeret. Trykt hos J. H. Schultz, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Matzen H (1910) Den Danske Forfatningsret. Universitetsbogtrykkeriet (J.H. Schultz), Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Melchior T (2003) Maastricht, Tvind og hvad så...?. In: Iversen T et al (eds) Hyldesskrift til Jørgen Nørgaard. Jurist - og Økonomforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen, pp 201–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Møller A (1925) Folkeretten i Fredstid og Krigstid. G.E.C. Gad, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen HP (2003) Når praksis overhaler grundloven. In: Jørgensen S et al (eds) Nye Retlige Design. Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, Copenhagen, pp 91–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiermann O (1999) Moderne Folkeret. Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiermann O (2004) Moderne Folkeret. Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahle H (2005) Praktisk Retsfilosofi. Christian Ejlers Forlag, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Danish Institute for Human Rights (DIHR), Copenhagen, Denmark

    Jonas Christoffersen

Authors
  1. Jonas Christoffersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonas Christoffersen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    Stefan Kadelbach

  2. Faculty of Law, Augsburg University, Augsburg, Germany

    Thilo Rensmann

  3. Faculty of Law, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Eva Rieter

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Christoffersen, J. (2019). Denmark. In: Kadelbach, S., Rensmann, T., Rieter, E. (eds) Judging International Human Rights. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94848-5_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94848-5_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94847-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94848-5

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation