Will Denmark no longer be bound by the Geneva Convention?
Government and opposition have a long-standing dispute with the 1951 Geneva convention, which Denmark was the first country to sign.
The
Danish parliament approved an anti-immigration law on Thursday, which
the UNHCR decried “could fuel fear (and) xenophobia”. The European
Parliament is to debate the new Danish bill on Monday, prior to its
signature by Queen Margrethe. The law is likely to be in force from February onwards.
The law makes permanent residence for asylum seekers harder to get, delays family reunification, and allows the police to confiscate migrant’s money in excess of €1350 (10,000 Kroner). The center-right, liberal-conservative Prime Minister, Lars Loekke Rasmussen, defended his government’s position last week as the “the most misunderstood bill in Denmark’s history.”
However, it is no secret the new Danish law is perceived to be in conflict with the 1951 Geneva Convention. Denmark could be in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the UN Refugee Convention, the UNHCR concluded in a January report.
Last Friday, January 15th, the Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, Nils Muiznieks, suggested that the issue of family reunification raises “issues of compatibility with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which protects the right to respect for one’s family life.”
When it comes to asylum law, this is not the first time Denmark has had to defend its human rights record. That is why Denmark’s Foreign Minister was at the UNCHR offices in Geneva on Thursday, to defend Denmark’s human rights policies, old and new.
The case for Denmark’s new legislation was made in December by Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen himself. Rather than defend Denmark’s record, Rasmussen called for reforms to the Geneva Convention on the rights of refugees, in view of the ongoing asylum crisis.
Significantly, Rasmussen wants to see “flexibility” in the right of refugees to apply for asylum in a second asylum country and the limitation of family reunification rights. These are precisely the rights that Denmark annulled by means of national legislation on Thursday. Ironically, Denmark was the first country to sign the 1951 Geneva Convention.
Of course, it would be wrong to blame Denmark’s conservative-liberal government for a radical policy shift. Under the previous Social Democratic Danish Administration of Helle Thorning Schmidt, Denmark adopted a bill that allows family reunification only after three years, but was unable to apply this to all asylum seekers because of the Refugee Convention.
Helle Thorning Schmidt also introduced a type of “temporary asylum” that would allow for deportation as soon as conditions in the refugee’s own country were perceived to be better, that is, irrespectively of how many years they have lived in the country. In November 2014 she introduced legislation that obstructed family reunification for asylum seekers, to which UNCHR objected. And she openly undermined the European Commission’s proposal for an asylum quota system in February 2015.
Interestingly, in September 2015, the newly elected government of Prime Minister Rasmussen nominated Helle Thorning Schmidt for the top job of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Days later, the very same administration kicked off a campaign in Europe and the Middle East with the message that asylum seekers fleeing war in Syria are not welcome in Denmark.
In 2015, 21,000 migrants applied for asylum in Denmark.
Ironically, “Geneva” is following Copenhagen’s example. Switzerland is introducing a law envisaging the confiscation of migrant property over 1,000 Swiss francs; in addition, asylum seekers who find a job in Switzerland will have to pay a 10% levy on their paycheck, in addition to their income tax, until they repay 15,000 Swiss francs in costs.
The law makes permanent residence for asylum seekers harder to get, delays family reunification, and allows the police to confiscate migrant’s money in excess of €1350 (10,000 Kroner). The center-right, liberal-conservative Prime Minister, Lars Loekke Rasmussen, defended his government’s position last week as the “the most misunderstood bill in Denmark’s history.”
However, it is no secret the new Danish law is perceived to be in conflict with the 1951 Geneva Convention. Denmark could be in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the UN Refugee Convention, the UNHCR concluded in a January report.
Last Friday, January 15th, the Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, Nils Muiznieks, suggested that the issue of family reunification raises “issues of compatibility with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which protects the right to respect for one’s family life.”
When it comes to asylum law, this is not the first time Denmark has had to defend its human rights record. That is why Denmark’s Foreign Minister was at the UNCHR offices in Geneva on Thursday, to defend Denmark’s human rights policies, old and new.
The case for Denmark’s new legislation was made in December by Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen himself. Rather than defend Denmark’s record, Rasmussen called for reforms to the Geneva Convention on the rights of refugees, in view of the ongoing asylum crisis.
Significantly, Rasmussen wants to see “flexibility” in the right of refugees to apply for asylum in a second asylum country and the limitation of family reunification rights. These are precisely the rights that Denmark annulled by means of national legislation on Thursday. Ironically, Denmark was the first country to sign the 1951 Geneva Convention.
Of course, it would be wrong to blame Denmark’s conservative-liberal government for a radical policy shift. Under the previous Social Democratic Danish Administration of Helle Thorning Schmidt, Denmark adopted a bill that allows family reunification only after three years, but was unable to apply this to all asylum seekers because of the Refugee Convention.
Helle Thorning Schmidt also introduced a type of “temporary asylum” that would allow for deportation as soon as conditions in the refugee’s own country were perceived to be better, that is, irrespectively of how many years they have lived in the country. In November 2014 she introduced legislation that obstructed family reunification for asylum seekers, to which UNCHR objected. And she openly undermined the European Commission’s proposal for an asylum quota system in February 2015.
Interestingly, in September 2015, the newly elected government of Prime Minister Rasmussen nominated Helle Thorning Schmidt for the top job of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Days later, the very same administration kicked off a campaign in Europe and the Middle East with the message that asylum seekers fleeing war in Syria are not welcome in Denmark.
In 2015, 21,000 migrants applied for asylum in Denmark.
Ironically, “Geneva” is following Copenhagen’s example. Switzerland is introducing a law envisaging the confiscation of migrant property over 1,000 Swiss francs; in addition, asylum seekers who find a job in Switzerland will have to pay a 10% levy on their paycheck, in addition to their income tax, until they repay 15,000 Swiss francs in costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment