HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONSIDERS REPORT OF DENMARK

The Human Rights Committee today concluded its consideration of the fifth periodic report of Denmark on the measures undertaken by that country to implement the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Presenting the report, Allan Rahbol Jacobsen, Head of the Human Rights Unit of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, underlined the Government’s strong conviction that peace, security, development and stability could only be installed on the basis of human rights. Denmark’ s international human rights policy focused on five issues: strengthening independent and effective international monitoring of compliance with international human rights standards; actively promoting Danish priorities such as fighting torture, promoting freedom of expression and supporting the rights of indigenous peoples; taking critical and consistent action against human rights violations anywhere; strengthening democratization and development; and enhancing cooperation with civil society.

In preliminary remarks, the Chairman of the Committee, Rafael Rivas Posada, thanked the delegation for the extremely enriching dialogue and the information relating to the positive measures that Denmark had taken to implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Concerning the issue of women, the Chairman acknowledged that progress had been made. However, there were still shortcomings, particularly in the private sector. Despite the explanations given by the delegation, the Committee thought that solitary confinement could go on for far too long in Denmark. With regard to religious freedom, he stated that for a country that respected human rights as Denmark, recognizing a church as a national church was problematic.

Over the course of two meetings, the Danish delegation answered questions by the Committee members relating to a number of issues, including Denmark’s reservations towards some provisions of the Covenant; Denmark’s reluctance to integrating the Covenant in Danish legislation; juvenile offenders; measures against domestic violence; alleged CIA flights over Danish and Greenlandic airspace; guarantees against refoulement; the relation between the State and the National Church; the German minority; and the indigenous people of Greenland and the Roma.

The Danish delegation was also made up of members of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Refugees, Immigration and Integration Affairs; the Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs; the Department of Gender Equality; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Faroes; the Greenland Home-Rule – Department of Foreign Affairs; and the Danish Mission to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

When the Committee resumes its work at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will start its review of the second periodic report of Monaco (CCPR/C/MCO/2).


Report of Denmark

The fifth periodic report of Denmark (CCPR/C/DNK/5) deals with changes in legislation and administrative practice among others, relating to the material provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights since the submission of Denmark’s fourth periodic report in December 1998. The report touches on various issues, including the takeover of affairs by the Faroese Government, juvenile offenders in prison facilities and the equality of religions.

The Faroes are a geographically separate and well-defined part of the Danish realm covering an area of 1,399 square kilometres with a population of 48,378 as of 31 December 2006. In 1948, the Faroes Home Rule Arrangement was established and the Faroes became a self-governing community within the Kingdom of Denmark. With the Act relating to the takeover of affairs by the Faroese public authorities, which entered into force on 29 July 2005, the possibilities available to the Faroese public authorities under the Home Rule Act to take over fields of affairs were expanded significantly. The Takeover Act made it possible for the Faroese public authorities to take over all affairs and fields of affairs apart from the Constitution, citizenship, the Supreme Court, foreign, security and defense policy and foreign exchange and monetary policy. The Home Rule Act contains a number of hearing mechanisms and cooperation procedures that are designed to safeguard the interests of the Faroes. In practice, Government bills that affected or might be implemented in the Faroes are submitted to the Faroese public authorities for their comments before they were brought before the Danish Parliament. Corresponding hearing procedures applied to administrative regulations and draft treaties.

The existing special rules applying to placement of 15 to 17-year-old inmates had been revised in accordance with the information given in Denmark’s fourth periodic report. In accordance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, only a very few juveniles are placed in the Danish prisons and local gaols. In 2006 the average daily number of juveniles between 15 and 17 in Danish prisons was 17.7, divided into 3.9 in closed prisons, 2.6 in open prisons and 11.2 in local prisons. In all cases where a juvenile under the age of 18 has been sentenced to serve in prison, it must be considered by the Prison and Probation Service whether there are reasons to place the juvenile in question in a treatment institution or the like. The basic idea is that these juveniles should be placed in a pension under the Prison and Probation Service or in an institution etc. outside of the Prison and Probation Service, unless decisive consideration to the enforcement of justice speaks against such placement. The juveniles awaiting trial, who are not in a social institution or the like, would normally be placed in a local gaol, where the possibility to be together with other inmates is very limited. Apart from this there is a very small group of juveniles, who serve short sentences in local gaols.

Regarding freedom and equality of religion, the report states that the Constitutional Act contained a provision saying that the Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark and, as such, it shall be supported by the State. Until 1849 membership of the Evangelical Lutheran Church was compulsory, and today the Church still counted about 83 per cent of the entire population of Denmark as members.

Introduction of the Report

ALLAN RAHBOL JACOBSEN, Head of the Human Rights Unit of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, introducing the report, said that Denmark upheld the strong belief that lasting peace, security, development and stability could only be achieved on the basis of human rights.
Denmark’ s international human rights policy focused on five issues: strengthening independent and effective international monitoring of compliance with international human rights standards; actively promoting Danish priorities such as fighting torture, promoting freedom of expression and supporting the rights of indigenous peoples; taking critical and consistent action against human rights violations anywhere; strengthening democratization and development and enhancing cooperation with civil society.

Mr. Jacobsen emphasized two developments that occurred after the drafting of the report: the submission of a draft Act by the Greenlandish-Danish Self-Government Commission on Greenland Self-Government in May 2008 and police and court reforms. The draft Act was expected to enter into force on 21 June 2009. According to the new law, the self-government authorities might decide to take over legislative and executive power in a large number of additional fields, except fields excluded by the Constitution, such as foreign policy, security policy and citizenship. Regarding the future economic relations, the Government subsidy remained unchanged at the 2007 level, i.e. DKK 3.2 billion (approximately 600 million United States dollars) a year. Greenland itself would finance fields of responsibility that would be taken over in the future and the revenue from mineral resource activities in Greenland accrued to the Self-governments authorities. The Greenlandish-Danish Self-Government Commission’s proposal regarding access to independence of Greenland encompassed that a decision regarding independence should be taken by the people of Greenland. Following such a decision negotiations would commence between the Landsstyre, the Greenlandic governmental body, and the Danish Government with a view to concluding an agreement on the implementation of independence. This must then be approved by a referendum.

Regarding the police and court reforms, Mr. Jacobsen said that the Danish Parliament had adopted in June 2006 the most important reform of the police and courts for several generations. The implementation of the reform had begun on 1 January 2007 and would continue until 2011. The police reform meant that 54 police districts were transformed into 12 police districts. The main objective was to achieve a more modern police service with sustainable police districts that on their own were able to carry out major investigations and provide large-scale emergency and support services. The court reform meant that the number of district courts was reduced from 82 to 24 and that the vast majority of the cases would now be tried by district courts at first instance, including the most serious criminal cases tried with jurors. The main objective was to modernise the judicial system so as to ensure the highest possible level of professional competence, flexibility, and service as well as efficient case administration.

Answers to Written Questions Sent to Denmark in Advance

The delegation of Denmark presented answers to questions sent from the Committee in advance. Regarding a new Constitution for the Faroes including provisions with regard to a future referendum in respect of the possible secession of the Faroes from the Kingdom of Denmark, the delegation said that an ad hoc committee was established on 7 May 2007. When the parliamentary session ended in July 2007 the mandate of that committee lapsed. The newly elected coalition however planned to finalise the Constitution and hold a referendum in 2010.

Turning to the question concerning the obstacles to incorporate the Covenant in Danish law, the delegation said that the decision of the Government not to incorporate the Covenant was not related to legal obstacles. The Government did not consider it legally necessary to incorporate the Covenant, because the Covenant was already being applied by the courts and other authorities as a relevant source of law.

The Committee had recommended earlier on that Denmark should consider withdrawing some or all reservations to the Covenant. The delegation noted that there were currently no deliberations on the withdrawal of the reservations.

As for Denmark’s efforts to enhance the participation of women in public life, the delegation said that in local politics the proportion of women had remained unchanged at 27 per cent from the elections in 2001 to 2005. 2008 marked the 100th year since women gained the right to vote in local government and the Minister for Gender Equality would celebrate this occasion with an awareness-raising campaign. The objective for the next local government elections in 2009 was to place focus on the low number of women in local politics and to provide advice on what could be done to change the situation. Since 2003, the Minister for Gender Equality had focused on women in management. In the private sector women accounted for a mere 4 per cent of senior executives. The strategy for the Minister’s action was based on cooperation, dialogue and knowledge sharing with cooperation partners in the private sector. It must be made clear that women in management meant better executive teams and better opportunities to address all the enterprise’s customer segments. Rather than introduce quotas, the Minister had decided to launch a charter for more women in management in March 2008. On the Faroe Islands, an independent committee had been appointed in 2005 with the explicit assignment to encourage more women to participate in politics.

Turning to the State’s efforts to promote equality between National Church members and members of other religions, the delegation said that religious communities other than the National Church continued to receive subsidies from the State. Taxpayers could deduct contributions to other religious communities in their tax returns. The delegation mentioned two cases in which Catholics had filed a law suit against the Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs. In both cases the plaintiffs contested that paragraph 4 of the Danish Constitution was in conflict with the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the grounds that the Government grant to the National Church was pertinent to the proclamation of the Lutheran-Evangelical Church and that non-members of the national Church were forced to contribute personally to another religion than their own through their general taxes. The Court ruled that there was no direct connection between regular taxes and the State’s economic grant to religious activities of the National Church, as non-members of the National Church did not pay specific church-tax. Non-members of the National Church only contributed indirectly to the Government grant through their regular taxes.

Regarding the subject of torture, the delegation drew attention to the fact that the Danish Criminal Code was amended with a special section on torture. The amendment entered into force on 1 July 2008. According to this insertion it was now considered an aggravating circumstance when sentencing that a violation of the Criminal Code had been committed by torture. The amendment contained a definition of torture which was created with the definition of torture in the United Nations Convention against Torture in mind. Although acts of torture were already criminalized by existing sanctions of the Danish Criminal Code, the new amendment ensured that such acts were easier to register, and that the specific nature and coarseness of the crime was reflected in a more adequate manner in connection with the criminal proceedings.

As to guarantees against possible refoulement of persons who may be exposed to a violation of their rights in the country of return, the delegation referred to the Danish Aliens Act. According to the Act, a residence permit would be issued to an alien upon application, if the alien fell within the provisions of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Following the Aliens Act, a rejection of a claim of asylum must include a decision as to whether the alien in question could be removed from the country if he or she did not voluntarily leave. An alien could not be returned to a country where he would be at the risk of death penalty or of being subjected to torture or inhuman of degrading treatment or punishment, or be sent to another country where the alien would not be protected against being sent on to such country.

Regarding measures taken to address domestic violence and sexual harassment perpetrated against women, an action plan for the years 2005 to 2008 was in place. It included support for the victims and target activities at the perpetrators among other measures. An inter-ministerial working group monitored the implementation and published an annual situation report on the implementation. The Greenland Home Rule Government had decided to create a national strategy against violence, rape and sexual abuse in order to break taboos concerning violence, rape and sexual abuse and to make available information on how to help children, youth and adults afflicted by it.

Regarding alleged CIA flights through Danish and Greenlandic airspace, the delegation explained that an inquiry had been launched to examine all existing information. The inquiry was conducted by a Task Force chaired by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its report was expected to be published mid-October, which unfortunately had not happened yet. The delegation stressed that no decision had been made to rely on diplomatic assurances. The Minister of Refugees, Immigration and Integration had established a working party on administrative deportation of foreign nationals, who were deemed a danger to national security. The working party was expected to consider diplomatic assurances. However, Denmark recognized that diplomatic assurances did not release a State from its obligations under international human rights, humanitarian and refugee law, in particular the principle of non-refoulement.

There were no current deliberations to introduce an absolute limit on the duration of solitary confinement of persons detained on remand. Solitary confinement meant that the detainee was excluded from association with other detainees, but had extensive rights to compensate for that exclusion, such as a visit at least once a week and long conversations with e.g. a priest, doctor or psychologist. Offenders in solitary confinement must be offered special access to individual tuition in order to reduce the special strain and risk of disturbance of mental health which solitary confinement entailed. Solitary confinement could be brought before the courts for judicial review and before the parliamentary ombudsman.

Regarding the number of juvenile offenders serving their sentence together with adults in an open prison, the delegation said that there was currently only one such case. The reason for this was Denmark’s experience that placement in special young offender’s units might involve some disadvantages to the young offenders. However, the Prison and Probation Service had received funding to open a special unit attached to Jyderup State Prison for 15 to 17-year-old-offenders.

Questions Raised by Committee Members

A Committee Expert said that Denmark’s report was self-critical on some issues, which was commendable. However, it was very thin on other issues, such as an overall application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights for Greenland and the Faroe Islands. Several Experts were surprised about the low level of involvement of non governmental organizations (NGOs) in the preparation of the report and asked if Denmark could have done more to get NGOs interested. How did Danish civil society react to what happened with regard to human rights and treaty bodies?

An Expert asked Denmark to reflect on reservations to human rights treaties in general and the Covenant specifically. The inclusion of a definition of torture in Danish legislation was positively highlighted. It showed once again that Denmark was very committed to the abolition of torture. Physical torture was usually covered by criminal law in many countries, but mental torture often was not. The Expert said he would like some reassurance that there were no gaps in Danish law in that respect.

Regarding the integration of the Covenant into national legislation, one Expert said that the Government did not seem to want to follow the advice of the Committee. Why was there this degree of obstinacy to integrating it? What were the obstacles? Another Expert asked how often the Covenant had been invoked before Danish courts? Was the Covenant invoked less frequently because it was not incorporated?

As to juvenile offenders held with adults in one prison, the Expert asked for further clarifications as to why this child had to be kept with adults. She asked the delegation to further elaborate on ill-treatment in prisons, on the Faroe Islands as well. Further, what was the longest time period that somebody could be held in Denmark? The Expert welcomed the tags that Denmark started to administer instead of imprisonment before the trial and wanted more information as for how far this was feasible. She also wondered why the solitary confinement could be indefinite as it seemed to be.

Regarding violence against women, an Expert drew attention to the fact that women were reluctant to report the violence they had suffered. She asked what support was offered to women who decided to report their abuse. Were there special procedures in place? How was the need for shelter met? Migrant women were especially reluctant to report their cases and the Expert asked whether Denmark had undertaken any steps to help these migrant women. Another Expert asked whether customs were in keeping with women’s rights on the Faroe Islands. Regarding women in private enterprises, the Expert suggested public-private partnerships and asked whether that had been discussed.

Several Experts commented on the alleged CIA flights through Danish airspace. An Expert asked if it was possible to comment on the topic although the report of the Task Force had not been released yet. Regarding diplomatic assurances, the Expert asked the delegation to comment on the compatibility with the Covenant regarding the assurance that suspected terrorists were not returned to countries where the death penalty existed. Another Expert emphasized the issue of diplomatic assurances. He noted that the principles of non-refoulement could be violated in this context. For example, 68 individuals had been sent back to Iraq in deportation and not through a judicial procedure. Regarding the detention of illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers, the Expert asked if Denmark was aware of asylum-seekers that had been detained for two years.

One Expert said he was uncomfortable seeing the privileges that were only extended to the national church and asked for further elaboration. Since 83 per cent of the population was in the national church, what was the religious breakdown for the remaining 17 per cent? Did they have a different status from the others? To conclude he asked if Denmark experienced religious extremism.

Replies to Oral Questions

The delegation said with regard to the assertion of Experts that there was only a low level of involvement by non governmental organizations in the reporting procedure of Denmark to this Committee, the reason for that might be that this Committee dealt with general issues and was not as specialized, as for example on children’s rights, where non governmental organizations existed. Interest of the non governmental organizations was more likely to be focused on specific subjects. Also, the Danish society was more interested in issues with a European context. On the Faroe Islands and Greenland, there were non governmental organizations and interest groups mainly focused on the rights of indigenous peoples.

Regarding the reservations to the Covenant, the delegation said that there were no formal deliberations, but Denmark was very committed to continually overview its position.

Turning to the questions on juvenile offenders, the delegation explained that the one juvenile offender that was in prison in Denmark right now was being held with adults because he would be alone otherwise. In general, juvenile offenders were not sent to prison at all, which explained the extremely low number. It was not feasible to make special units, because there were only very few persons in those units and if one unit was created in one place, the offenders would often be far away from home.

The national church enjoyed a special position in the national Constitution and also Danish society, the delegation said. The national church was performing as a state body in administering birth certificates for example. It also had to be noted that there were indirect grants to other religious groups through taxes.

Regarding the rights of persons before the trial, persons had the right to an attorney in the first 24 hours, before the first hearing of a judge. If there was a concrete need to a doctor, one would be called as well. The longest detention from the arrest until the judgement in 2006 was two years, a case involving many defendants.

As to foot bracelets, there were people who preferred to go to prison instead of having to wear such a bracelet at home. It was however less costly than a place in prison. The delegation added that the solitary confinement was only limited to the impossibility of contact with other detainees and did not entail other consequences.

Continuation of Answers to Written Questions Sent to Denmark in Advance

Regarding the allocation of refugees to a municipality, the provisions of the Integration Act fully complied with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the delegation said. The main aim of the provision was to ensure that newly arrived recognized refugees were offered an introduction programme and provided with adequate housing. The provision did not contain a prohibition of the refugee’s free choice of residence. A refugee might settle in another municipality if the refugee wished to do so. However, in order to continue the introduction programme in the new municipality, the new municipality must accept to assume the responsibility for the introduction programme. The new municipality was under certain circumstances obliged to assume the responsibility for the continuation of the introduction programme, for instance if the refugee had been offered employment in the new municipality. If the new municipality denied assuming the responsibility for the introduction programme, this might have consequences for the refugee’s access to an introduction allowance and permanent residence permit.

As to the proposed reform of the judicial system in Greenland, the delegation said that a new Criminal Code for Greenland and a new Administration of Justice Act for Greenland were enacted in April 2008 and would enter into force on 1 January 2010.

Concerning the court reform and following improvements, the latest figures of the first half of 2008 showed that the courts were now finishing more cases than before the implementation of the court reform. The processing times in the district courts had not been reduced whereas the processing times in the high courts had been reduced substantially. The delegation stressed that the implementation of the court reform had required considerable effort. The courts had had to move to new premises and new organizational structures and new routines had been built up. These circumstances had led to an accumulation of cases, especially during 2007. It was expected that a reduction in the case processing time also in the district courts would be achieved gradually as the court reform fell into place.

As for the reform of the jury system, an Act concerning public access to documents in civil and criminal proceedings entered into force on 1 July 2004. The Court Administration had not encountered any difficulties in the implementation of the new rules. However, due to reports from the police districts, considerable resources were spent handling applications for access to documents in closed criminal cases. The Director of Public Prosecutions was currently looking into a number of issues relating to the handling of applications for access to documents in such cases. One issue was the form in which access to documents should be given in closed criminal cases, and another issue was how to handle what seemed to be an increasing number of applications from the media for access to documents in such cases.

As stated in Denmark’s fifth periodic report, legislation for a reform of the jury system was adopted in June 2006. The legislation entered into force on 1 January 2008, and as of that date Denmark complied with Article 14 of the Covenant, including in the most serious criminal cases, i.e. a person convicted in such a case had the right to the conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law. However, Denmark continued to restrict the right to appeal convictions in the least serious criminal cases, making an appeal dependent on a special permission from the Appeals Permission Board if the sentence did not exceed a fine of DKK 3,000, which was approximately 600 euros. For this reason there were no current deliberations on the withdrawal of the Danish reservation to Article 14 of the Covenant.

Regarding the so-called 24-year-rule which stipulated that non-resident-spouses could only be united and thus cohabit with their spouse living in Denmark when both parties had reached the age of 24, the delegation explained that the rule did not regulate the right to contract a marriage but stipulated at what age a couple could expect to obtain family reunification. However, certain exceptional reasons could make it inappropriate to refuse an application even though both parties were not over the age of 24, e.g. when refusal of an application would interfere with the right to respect for family life guaranteed in Article 8 in the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 8 did not involve a general and unconditional right to family reunification. However, according to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the provision implied that family reunification could not be refused in special cases. This rule had been made to combat forced marriages.

Regarding the compensation to the members of the Thule community in Greenland in respect to their displacement from their lands, the delegation explained that the case originated in the relocation of the Thule population in 1953 in connection with the establishment of the Thule Air Base under the 1951 US-Denmark Defence Agreement. The Thule Tribe and individual plaintiffs initiated proceedings against the Danish Prime Minister’s Office in 1996 before the High Court claiming compensation and right to return. In its judgment of 20 August 1999, the High Court ruled in favour of compensation (500,000 DKK to the Thule Tribe as such and 15,000 DKK for certain individual claims). Other claims such as the right to live in and use the abolished settlement and a right to access, occupy and hunt in the entire Thule district were dismissed. The Supreme Court stated that the Thule Tribe did not constitute a tribal people or a distinct indigenous people within or co-existing with the Greenlandic people as a whole. At this point, the Supreme Court was consistent with the declaration made by the Danish Government, acceded to by the Greenland Home Rule Government, in connection with the ratification of the ILO Convention. According to this declaration, Denmark had “only one indigenous people” in the sense of the Convention, namely the indigenous population in Greenland or the Inuit.

Regarding the German minority in Denmark, the fundamental rights of the German minority were protected by the general provisions of the Danish Constitutional Act and other legislation governing equal justice under the law and freedom of assembly and association. The Copenhagen-Bonn Declarations of 1955 provided an additional basis for the protection of the general rights of the two minorities north and south of the Danish-German border. The Copenhagen Declaration stipulated that a person may freely profess his loyalty to German nationality and German culture and that such a profession of loyalty must not be contested or verified by the authorities. Similarly, the Bonn Declaration lays down that a person may freely profess his loyalty to Danish nationality and Danish culture and that such a profession of loyalty must not be contested or verified. The Copenhagen-Bonn Declarations ensured that the minorities on both sides of the border were capable of preserving their identity and their linguistic and cultural characteristics, and the declarations therefore still provided the framework for the present peaceful co-existence of people living in the Danish-German borderland.

Concerning Roma in Denmark, it was noted that Roma in Denmark had arrived at very different times and from a variety of countries. They resided throughout the country, although most of them were based in the areas of Copenhagen and Elsinore. Roma were not registered specifically as Roma by the authorities, but according to the respective countries of which they were nationals. As a result, no information about the number of Roma currently living in Denmark was available. Many Roma were well integrated into the Danish society, while others had difficulty adjusting to life in Denmark.

As to steps taken to disseminate information on the Covenant, the delegation explained that the Covenant had been published in English, French and Danish in a manner parallel to legislation, it had been printed in a number of publications, and was available on several websites, including that of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Also, the Danish Police College had enhanced human rights training and education during 2006 and 2007. This was done, inter alia, by implementing an increase in the number of lessons on the subject. One of the lessons was devoted to the treatment by the police of victims of torture. Furthermore, the Police Knowledge and Research Centre had launched a one-year research programme relating to professional ethics. The programme would contribute to establishing a foundation for education in professional ethics in the future bachelor education programme.

Questions by the Committee Experts

Several Committee Experts asked questions regarding the Thule tribe and the compensation it had received for relocating. Earlier on, the Committee had been concerned that the victims of the Thule tribe had been induced to lower the compensation they asked for in order to reach an agreement. An Expert asked what the consequences were for the Thule tribe, as the Dundes area was relinquished. Several Experts asked if the delegation had said that indigenous peoples could not be covered under the provisions relating to minorities. They noted that the concept of minorities was not the same as the concept of indigenous peoples.

Regarding the German minority and minorities in general, Experts asked for further information of the subject, especially in connection with the European Framework Convention on Minorities. With respect to the Roma living in Denmark, an Expert said that the delegation had acknowledged that some Roma had a hard time integrating in the Danish society. What was the Danish Government doing to support them?

Experts also inquired about the content of the new legislation that had been enacted in Greenland. Was it based on the Danish Constitution? With respect to court reform, especially regarding the time it took to process a case, an Expert asked for further elaboration.

Welcoming legislation regarding appeals against criminal convictions, an Expert regretted however that there was no full access to an appeal court, but only through an Appeals Commission Board. How did this Board work and how could people who did not speak Danish communicate with the Board? The Expert wanted to know more on how to this Appeals Commission Board worked.

Answers by the Delegation to the Oral Questions Raised by the Committee

Regarding the new Greenlandic Criminal Code, the delegation said that it was an updating of the Criminal Code, taking into account the specifics of Greenland. It also included legal training to persons that were not lawyers. The Code was increasingly closer to Danish Criminal Code, especially regarding international treaties.

Concerning the Appeals Commission Board, the delegation explained that this was an independent five-person board, including judges, a lawyer and a university professor of law. There was also a possibility for a person to be provided with legal aid, if necessary.

The delegation said that Denmark saw the Universal Periodic Review process as a learning process. Denmark would engage with non governmental organizations in the process. The Covenant was not translated into other languages that were not part of the Danish realm, or the language of the Faroe Islands. The delegation offered to provide links to the respective country pages.

Regarding the 24-year-old rule for family reunification, the delegation confirmed that it was consistent with Denmark’s international obligations.

On minorities, the delegations answered that the German minority was recognized under the European Framework Convention on Minorities. Denmark had spent a lot of time discussing a definition of minorities and had deliberately decided not to define it. However, the understanding was that minorities were minorities because borders of countries in Europe had changed, not because people had left a country. As for the Roma, it was mainly problems of a social nature that they encountered. Municipalities for example tried to convince Roma to bring their kids to school.

With respect to the Thule tribe, the delegation said that neither the peoples in Greenland or the Faroe Islands would be happy to be considered as minorities. They were peoples living in their own land that was part of the Danish realm. Although self-identification was an important element, it was not the only element. It could be used as a negative definition, in the sense that if a people did not consider themselves as indigenous they were not. In Denmark, there was only one indigenous population that was not a minority, which was in Greenland. The Thule tribe was part of the Greenlandic indigenous people.

Comments by the Committee Members

An Expert was critical of the fact that human rights issues were taught in English at police schools in order to reach the double goal of teaching English and human rights. In that way human rights did not get the importance they deserved. The Expert also called on Denmark to consider translating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in Faroese.

One Expert drew attention to the fact that there could be minorities among the indigenous people of Greenland. Another Expert stressed the fact that a fundamental element was how a people self-identified. Although there was no codified definition in international law, there was customary law which was also referred to by the Committee.

Answers by the Delegation

The delegation answered that there had so far not been any requests to translate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or concluding remarks into Faroese. Also, on the Faroe Islands, Danish was even more widespread than Faroese. Regarding German, there were no members of the German minority that did not speak Danish as well, so a translation would be redundant.

Regarding Greenland, there were local dialects in Greenland, but one Greenlandic language was spoken in school. Concerning the question of the Thule tribe, the delegation explained that returning to the Dundes area was mainly a psychological desire. The relinquishment of the land had taken place 50 years ago and the tribe had now settled elsewhere.

Preliminary Remarks

RAFAEL RIVAS POSADA, Chairman of the Committee, in preliminary remarks, thanked the delegation for the extremely enriching dialogue and the information relating to the positive measures that Denmark had taken to implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Regarding Denmark’s reservations to the Covenant, the Chairman underlined that the Committee did not call into question the right of States to make reservations. To the contrary, it was important that States could make such reservations in order to adjust to their specific situations. States parties could later on withdraw the reservations, if they were no longer judged as necessary. The Committee assumed that Denmark was willing to consider this.

The Committee was concerned that despite the reform in the criminal code, there was still a differentiation made between different crimes when it came to the possibility of appeal. The Covenant had not foreseen exceptions based on the seriousness of the crime. Furthermore, Denmark’s failure to incorporate the Covenant into Danish law was worrisome. Not integrated, the Covenant would purely be one element of international law. This could be taken into account or left aside however the user wished. Therefore it was important to consider incorporating the Covenant into domestic law.

Regarding the issue of women, the Chairman acknowledged that progress had been made. However, there were still shortcomings, particularly in the private sector, which had been acknowledged by the delegation. The Chairman said that changing social behaviour was not always easy and decisive action should be carried out by Denmark.

Despite the explanations given by the delegation, the Committee thought that solitary confinement could go on for far too long in Denmark.

Regarding religious freedom, the Chairman stated that for a country that respected human rights as Denmark, recognizing a church as a national church was problematic. It was worrying to see that the various functions of the church and tax issues could give rise to inequalities.


For use of the information media; not an official record


CT08017E