.svg) |
|---|
Human rights in the Kingdom of Denmark are protected by the state's Constitution of theRealm(Danmarks Riges Grundlov); applying equally in Denmark proper,Greenland and theFaroe Islands, and through theratification ofinternational human rights treaties.[1] Denmark has held a significant role in the adoption of both theEuropean Convention on Human Rights and in the establishment of theEuropean Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In 1987, theKingdom Parliament (Folketinget) established a national human rights institution, the Danish Centre of Human Rights, now theDanish Institute for Human Rights.[1]
While Denmark and otherScandinavian countries have historically been "defenders of international law and human rights",[2] issues in regard to human rights still exist or have emerged in recent times, includingviolence against women, the rights ofLGBTI people,[3] as well asmass surveillance of marginalized groups.[4]
In its 2024Freedom in the World report,Freedom House rated the country "free" with a score of 97 (out of 100).[5]
Personal liberty shall be inviolable. No Danish subject shall in any manner whatever be deprived of his liberty because of his political or religious convictions or because of his descent.
The Kingdom of Denmark is aconstitutional monarchy. The Constitutional Act or(Grundloven), which was adopted on 5 June 1849, lays the foundations of democracy in the organisation of theRealm of Denmark.[6]
The Constitution has been amended three times since its adoption in 1849. The most significant of these amendments occurred in 1953, leading to the Constitution in use today, as it granted "clear constitutional authority to share Denmark's sovereignty with other countries".[7] This was important as it aimed to prepare Denmark for the potential membership to theEuropean Union.[7]
While the role of the Constitutional Act is to restrict the authority of the monarchy, it is also to ensure that human rights as well as civil and political rights are guaranteed for Danish citizens.[8] Examples of these include the right toPersonal Liberty (Section 71),Freedom of Expression (Section 77) andFreedom of Assembly (Section 79).
In addition, the Constitution guaranteesFreedom of Religion (Section 67), provided that these religious communities do not threaten "good morals or public order".[9]
These rights, enshrined in the Constitution, enjoy "special status.".[8] In addition, as outlined in Section 88 of the Constitution, these rights are the "supreme source ofDanish law"[8]
The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is a treaty that was ratified by 47 member states of theCouncil of Europe on 3 September 1953.[10] The aim of the treaty is to both "protect the rule of law"[10] and to endorse democracy in Europe. The European Convention was the first treaty to provide institutional means of supervising and enforcing human rights across Europe.[11] To achieve this, the convention established two enforcement measures - theEuropean Commission of Human Rights and theEuropean Court of Human Rights.
Although ratified in 1953, the convention was not incorporated in Danish law until 29 April 1992. As a result of its incorporation indomestic law, courts of Denmark have a duty to enforce the convention.[12] The European Convention on Human Rights is the only treaty concerning human rights in Danish law at present.[8] Significant civil and political rights that are guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights include theright to liberty,right to a fair trial,freedom of thought,freedom of conscience andfreedom of religion andfreedom of expression.[13]
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or ECHR), established in 1959 by the European Convention on Human Rights, is the Council of Europe'scourt of law. Its purpose is to examine and make judgments on complaints of allegedhuman rights violations.[14]
In the early stages of the ECtHR's foundation, theScandinavian countries were some of the first to agree to the optional clauses on its jurisdiction, thus strengthening its political legitimacy.[2] In addition, Denmark and the otherNordic states were prominent figures in the preliminary construction of the ECtHR system, and in its finalisation.[2]
Section 71 of the Constitution focuses oninalienable rights, as well as ensuring citizens' protection from unreasonable restraint and guaranteeing one'sright to a fair trial. The direct quote below outlines the fact that a Danish citizen cannot be detained due to their religion, race or political view:[6]
Personal liberty shall be inviolable. No Danish subject shall in any manner whatever be deprived of his liberty because of his political or religious convictions or because of his descent.
— Article 71,Constitution of Denmark, 1953
Section 77 of the Constitution guaranteesfreedom of speech, andfreedom of the press, both of which are recognised ashuman rights under theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). While the government largely respects these rights, legal restrictions are in place forlibel,blasphemy andracism.[15]
In March 2015, discussions surrounding the removal of legal restrictions for blasphemy were suspended as the Government of Denmark confirmed that itsanti blasphemy law would remain in place.[15]
Section 79 of the Constitution protects citizens' right to gather for peaceful assembly. This is recognised as a human right under international human rights instruments such as theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights and theEuropean Convention on Human Rights.Freedom of Assembly is understood as the right to protest peacefully, and without arms.
Section 79 also provides that if an assembly is a threat to public peace, it may be dissolved by the police.[9]
In its 2024Freedom in the World report,Freedom House rated the country 4 out of 4 for religious freedom.[5]
Freedom of religion is regarded as a fundamental human right, as outlined in Article 18 of theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights. In addition it is entrenched in Section 67 of the Danish Constitution, which provides that citizens are entitled to establish and join religious congregations or communities. However, it also specifies that a religious group may not present a threat to "good morals or the public order".[9]
With the rise inreligious extremism, government restrictions on religion are beginning to increase.
Examples include the Kingdom parliament's ban on wearing full face veils, enacted in May 2018.[16] This law is seen as problematic as it targets less than 0.1% of Denmark's population — Muslim women whose choose to wear theniqab or theburqa.[16]
In addition, a law introduced in 2019 requires a person to shake hands with officials at theirnaturalisation ceremony if they wish to take Danish citizenship.[17] This has prompted human rights concerns in regard to freedom of religion as it is argued it targets Muslim and Jewish groups who demonstrate "lack of assimilation".[17] The Danish Government, however, maintains that this law has been established solely to elevate a "social custom to a national value".[17]
Following the atrocities ofWorld War II, the international community established theUnited Nations in 1945. In order to promote international peace and equality, they developed theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which was adopted by theUnited Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948. The declaration was established as "a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations".[18]
The UDHR was the first of its kind, as it was a codification of human rights without discrimination and incorporated entitlements that related to all spheres of human life and personality.[19] Although it is not a treaty and therefore not legally binding, it was hoped that it would serve as a model for domestic laws and later binding treaties.[19] In addition, the UDHR, which is still in use today, acts as a mechanism to uphold values such as "universal equality and freedom, supporting decolonisation, good governance and the struggle against discrimination".[19]
On21 April 1967, the elected government inGreece was overthrown in acoup d'état led by a group of Greek colonels (military junta) In September 1967, theNordic states including Denmark, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands appealed to theEuropean Commission of Human Rights to hold Greece accountable for their violation of what are considered to be human rights by theEuropean Convention on Human Rights.[20] As a result, theCouncil of Europe passed a resolution on 15 April 1970 that made the Report of the Human Rights Commission on theGreek Case public.[21] This report found that, as initially put forward by the Nordic states, many of the human rights under theEuropean Convention on Human Rights had been violated by the Greek government.[21]
Furthermore, from the 1970s the Nordic states played a significant role in supportingnon-governmental human rights organisations and actors.[22] For example, theHelsinki Watch, a non-governmental organisation based in the U.S. and established in 1978, was crucial to advocating for human rights in this period.[23] The Helsinki Watch led the formation of theInternational Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF) founded in 1982.[23] As early as 1985, the IHF had committees in a number of European countries including Denmark. This early support for international human rights is what has secured its reputation in Denmark as a "vehicle of progressive change."[22]
Denmark is argued by some to have some of Europe's "most aggressive anti-immigrant policies."[24] The people of Denmark are largely divided in their opinions on immigration – some accepting of it and others who are concerned and thus want restrictive policies in place.[24]
In 2016, the Danish annulled its agreement with theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) that stated that it would receive 500 refugees on an annual basis for resettlement.[3]
In 2018, Denmark announced that it would no longer resettle refugees under the United Nation's quota system, with the decision to accept refugees being made by the government and not the parliament.[3]
In addition, in late 2018 the Danish government announced that the 2019 budget would include funding for a scheme that would see foreign criminals who had completed jail sentences, but could not be deported, to be moved to Lindholm Island.[25] Lindholm Island is located three kilometres out from the southeast of Denmark, and had previously been a laboratory for animals with highly contagious diseases.[26] The policy has been labelled as being "barbaric" and "deeply repulsive."[26]
In January 2021, European Website on Integration reported that, "Denmark does not subscribe to EU rules in what related to refugee and legal issues and Denmark has refused to participate in a voluntary distribution agreement within EU."[27]
In March 2021, the Danish government announced limits on ‘non-western’ immigrants, it revoked the residency permits of refugees and vulnerable asylum seekers. Also, a major local study revealed that a third of the refugees were not properly protected.[28]
Moreover, on 19 May 2021, Denmark faced condemnation from EU lawmakers, the UNHCR, andhuman rights groups for revoking residency status forSyrian refugees. Despite thecritical security situation in Syria, Denmark claimed that some parts of thecountry are now safe enough for refugees to return.[29] Besides, in April 2021,Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor called on Denmark to return to the decision to return Syrian refugees to Syria and considered that Denmark's designation of Syria as ‘safe’ is dangerous, inhumane, and illegal.[30]
In 2014, Denmarkratified theIstanbul Convention (the Council of Europe's Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence). It classifies "rape and all othernon-consensual acts of a sexual nature"as being criminal offences.[31] However, the definition of rape in domestic Danish law is not based on the notion ofconsent and is instead based on the presence of "physical violence,threat orcoercion" or "if the victim is found to have been unable to resist."[31]
This is deemed to be problematic as the assumption that a victim gives their consent to a sexual act if they do not resist it physically ignores the possibility of "involuntary paralysis" or "freezing," and thus the inability to resist.[31]
In 2014 also, theEuropean Union Agency for Fundamental Rights said that, "Denmark has the highest spread rate of physical and sexual violence against women in Europe."[32] In addition, several reports say that Denmark has the highest prevalence ofsexual violence in Europe. Also,Amnesty International indicated that Denmark has "widespread sexual violence" and systemic problems in how it deals with rape. According to studies conducted, state that around 5,100 women a year are victims of rape or attempted rape.[33] A report published by Amnesty International in March 2019 states that women in Denmark rarely reported rape due to a "lack of trust in the justice system" and the poor treatment of victims throughout the legal process.[31] Also, Denmark has received harsh criticism for inadequate laws in regard to sexual violence.
In April 2018, the Danish opposition proposed the introduction of a "consent-based definition of rape" as outlined under the Istanbul Convention.[3] This was rejected in Parliament. In addition, pressure was put on the Danish government by theCouncil of Europe's Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO) to adapt its sexual violence legislation to include the notion of "freely given consent."[3]
On 18 January 1996, Denmark ratified the internationalIndigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (ILO-convention 169)[34] and votedin favour on the adoption of the proposal of the internationalDeclaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on 13 September 2007.[35]
Denmark has one officially recognizedindigenous groups: theInuit - theGreenlandic Inuit of Greenland and theGreenlandic people in Denmark (Inuit residing in Denmark). Despite there being around 70.000 people living and identifying as anInuk person, there is no official state registry defining the Inuit as Indigenous nor as a distinct people in the Kingdom of Denmark. Greenlandic Inuit are as nationals of Greenland,Citizens of the Realm of Denmark, and alsoEU citizens due to Greenlands associated relationship with theEuropean Union.
The Inuit are indigenous to theArctic and have traditionally inhabited Greenland and the northern parts of Canada and Alaska. The Inuit have for decades been the subject of discrimination and abuse by thedominant colonisers from Europe, those countries claiming possession of Inuit lands. The Inuit have never been a single community in a single region of Inuit.[36]
From the 18th century up to the 1970s, the Danish government (Dano-Norwegian until 1814) have through time tried to assimilate the Greenlandic Inuit, encouraging them to adopt the majority language, culture and religion. Denmark has been greatly criticised by the Greenlandic community for the politics ofDanization (50's and 60's) of and discrimination against the indigenous population of the country. Critical treatment paying non-Inuit workers higher wages than the local people, the relocation of entire families from their traditional lands into settlements, and separating children from their parents and sending them away to Denmark for schooling has been practiced.[37][better source needed][38]
In Denmark, theGreenlandic Inuit have the same rights as everyone else withDanish citizenship, but people with a Greenlandic Inuit background face a number of challenges in relation to enjoying equal treatment and opportunities as to othernationals of the realm.[39] In general, Greenlanders are not considered an ethnic minority, although some experience special linguistic, cultural and social challenges inDanish society in line with citizens with an ethnic minority background.
In Greenland the Inuit still maintain traditionalindigenous practices, such as hunting and fishing. The Inuit weresubjugated underDanish colonial rule from 1721 up through the twentieth century. In 1953, Greenland became a fully integrated part of theRealm of Denmark as theCounty of Greenland whereas Denmark implemented a severe policy of modernization through urbanization, relocating the Inuit from their small, subsistence-based communities to major cities. In 1979, Greenland successfully lobbied forautonomy from Denmark and achieved aHome Rule Government, which was expanded toSelf-Government in 2009.
Denmark's initial relationship with its Indigenous population reflected typical Western Europeanimperialism.
Until this day Greenlands autonomy is still not protected by the Danish constitution. Greenland is still astateless nation where its people do not possess their ownstate,[40] and do not have the majority population within theunitarynation state of the Kingdom of Denmark.[41] The term "stateless" implies that Greenland and its people "should have" such a state (country).[42][43] In contrast to if the Kingdom of Denmark was amultinational state that comprisesDenmark,Greenland and theFaroe Islands as equal nations orstates within the Kingdom in afederation, giving theirsovereignty to each other.
Greenland is not a member of anyState government,Council of State and neitherCouncil of Ministers of the Kingdom, but have achieved limited settlement lobbied by the Greenlandic MPs in the Kingdom Parliament (Folketinget).
On 7 February 2022, aEuro-Med Monitor's report revealed that Denmark has racist practices against the areas classified as "Ghetto." Theghetto areas include 29 areas throughout Denmark, and contain poor and weak population areas, the majority of which are residents of non-Western ethnicities and non-White. According to the report, Ghettos are subject to evictions, compulsory custody, double punishment, and excessive security measures. Moreover, the Danish policy practices towards minorities are a clear example of the practice of opportunistic policies, and of presenting minorities as a scapegoat to justify the failure to solve social problems. These policies have spread poverty, unemployment, insecurity and trust in areas of national minorities.[44]
A 2024 report byAmnesty International,Coded Injustice: Surveillance and Discrimination in Denmark’s Automated Welfare State, criticizes Denmark’s welfare authority,Udbetaling Danmark, for using AI-driven fraud detection systems that risk discriminating against people with disabilities, low-income individuals, migrants, and racial minorities. The report highlights how the use of up to 60 algorithms, including those assessing "foreign affiliation" and "unusual" living patterns, enables mass surveillance and can result in unfair targeting and privacy violations. Amnesty argues that these systems may function as a prohibited "social scoring system" under theEU AI Act and calls for their suspension, greater transparency, and stronger legal safeguards. Danish authorities have rejected Amnesty’s findings but have not provided full transparency into the system’s design or data use.[45]
Denmark was the first country to recogniseregistered partnerships (Danish:registreret partnerskab) between same-sex couples, in a law enacted on 7 June 1989. This granted theLGBTQ community many of the same rights asheterosexual couples; however it did not grant them "the right to adopt or obtain joint custody of a child".[46] On 15 June 2012, Denmark became the eleventh country in the world to legalisesame-sex marriage, the existing law being replaced bygender-neutralmarriage legislation.[47]
In January 2016, a resolution was implemented by theDanish parliament which preventedtransgender being classified as amental health condition.[3] In doing so, Denmark went against theWorld Health Organization (WHO) standards, which classifiedgender identity disorder as amental health issue until June 2018.[48][49][50]
Amnesty International's 2017–2018 report on 'The State of the World's Human Rights' states that Denmark's procedural rules surrounding access totransgender hormone therapy andgender-affirming surgery "unreasonably prolong the gender recognition process".[3] In addition, Amnesty International revealed that theDanish Health Authority has not yet established national guidelines outlining how children withvariations of sex characteristics should be treated by doctors.[3] As a result, "non-emergency invasive and irreversible medical procedures" may be conducted on children under the age of 10.[3] This directly violates the UN'sConvention on the Rights of the Child.
In May 2025, Denmark was convicted by theEuropean Court of Human Rights for violating theright to life after 23-year-old Ekrem Sahin died in 2011 inKolding Jail. The inmate was put in a leg lock and restrained on his stomach by several prison officers for almost 20 minutes. The court found that the prison had lacked clear guidelines and proper staff training for using thisrestraint technique. Sahin lost consciousness and died after three days in a coma. The case was brought by his mother, citing Articles 2 and 3 of theEuropean Human Rights Convention. This marks the first time Denmark has been found guilty of violating the right to life by the court. Domestic courts had previously dropped the case.[51]
In January 2016, a young man inVridsløselille Prison was subjected to a belt restraint in solitary confinement for nine days. The person was subsequently transferred toHerstedvester Prison, where he died shortly thereafter. The case, kept from public knowledge by the Danish Prison and Probation Service for over two years, raised serious concerns about potential violations of human rights. UN human rights expert Jens Modvig suggested that the prolonged restraint could constitute inhumane treatment or even torture.[52] During the same year, theDanish Institute for Human Rights noted "general concern at the conditions in which detained foreign nationals were held [at Vridsløselille], including lack of information, communication and human contact".[53]
In May 2022, during climate protests organized byExtinction Rebellion inCopenhagen, several demonstrators were subjected to unlawful treatment by the police. Nineteen out of 121 activists who later sued the Copenhagen Police were granted compensation, as the Copenhagen City Court (Københavns Byret) found the long duration of the detentions and strip searches of the activists illegal under Article 3 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights, as well as Danish police law. The protests, which included road blockades and demonstrations nearSlotsholmen andCopenhagen Airport, aimed to criticize Denmark's climate policies.[54]
Freedom in the World Score,Freedom House[1]
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | PR | CL | Free | PR | CL | Free | PR | CL | Free | PR | CL | Free | PR | CL | Free | Pts |
 Denmark* | 1 | 1 | Free | 1 | 1 | Free | 1 | 1 | Free | 1 | 1 | Free | 1 | 1 | Free | 97 |
