COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2023 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2023 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2023-07-05
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Denmark, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 5.7.2023  SWD(2023) 804 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2023 Rule of Law Report       Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2023 Rule of Law Report                        The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2023) 800 final} - {SWD(2023) 801 final} - {SWD(2023) 802 final} - {SWD(2023) 803 final} - {SWD(2023) 805 final} - {SWD(2023) 806 final} - {SWD(2023) 807 final} - {SWD(2023) 808 final} - {SWD(2023) 809 final} - {SWD(2023) 810 final} - {SWD(2023) 811 final} - {SWD(2023) 812 final} - {SWD(2023) 813 final} - {SWD(2023) 814 final} - {SWD(2023) 815 final} - {SWD(2023) 816 final} - {SWD(2023) 817 final} - {SWD(2023) 818 final} - {SWD(2023) 819 final} - {SWD(2023) 820 final} - {SWD(2023) 821 final} - {SWD(2023) 822 final} - {SWD(2023) 823 final} - {SWD(2023) 824 final} - {SWD(2023) 825 final} - {SWD(2023) 826 final} - {SWD(2023) 827 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  in  Denmark  continues  to  be  very  high.  On 
digitalisation, digital solutions to initate and follow administrative and criminal proceedings 
remain very limited, but the Danish courts are rolling out a multi-year project for an IT system 
to process criminal and probate cases with the first two phases for the probate portal and the 
handling of uncontested fines having been released. Analyses are ongoing related to ensuring 
adequate  human  and  financial  resources  for  the  justice  system  in  the  next  multiannual 
framework. Nevertheless, the resource situation is a concern and increasingly affects the length 
of proceedings, notably in civil and criminal cases, where the average case handling times for 
district courts have continued to grow compared to 2022.  

The  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  is  that  Denmark  is  one  of  the  least 
corrupt countries in the world. The strategic and institutional framework in the fight against 
corruption in Denmark continues to be based on general rules on ethics and integrity, social 
norms  and  public  scrutiny  with  a  high  degree  of  trust  in  the  well-functioning  of  the  public 
administration.  The  new  law  on  public  financing  of  political  parties  was  adopted  and 
discussions on a new law on private financing of political parties have started. Nevertheless, 
there  were  no  steps  taken  on  revolving  doors  for  ministers,  lobbying  or  asset  declarations 
submitted  by  persons  entrusted  with  top  executive  functions.  The  whistleblower  protection 
system  is  in  force  and  the  guidelines  addressed  to  whistleblowers,  public  authorities  and 
companies  are  supporting  the  implementation  of  the  legal  framework.  The  new  national 
investigative unit responsible for serious crimes, including complex corruption-related cases, 
works well, although general reporting on the handling of corruption-related offences is still 
lacking. 

Ethical rules for the press are currently being reviewed by a working group in Denmark and 
the committee of media liability appointed by the Government is examining the need to support 
the Danish Press Council system through the possible creation of a new media ombudsperson. 
While no steps have been taken to revise the Access to Public Administrative Documents Act, 
which  restricts  the  right  to  access  information  in  some  cases,  the  new  Government  has 
announced its intention to establish an expert committee to prepare a possible amendment to 
this Act. The mandate for this committee and the precise date of its establishment have yet to 
be announced. Budgetary cuts in local and regional papers pose some challenges to journalists 
who have called for greater support from the Government.  

The working procedures of the Parliament continue to be underpinned by a strong consensual 
culture.  The  current  Government  has  committed  to  follow-up  on  a  political  agreement  to 
strengthen Parliament's scrutiny of the Government and focus on trust in the political system. 
The Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Danish Institute for Human Rights have continued to 
carry  out  their  mission  independently  and  effectively.  The  civic  space  in  Denmark  remains 
open, with a robust framework for the involvement of civil society organisations, even if the 
Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights  has  expressed  concern  about  the  impact  of  advanced 
surveillance technologies on civic space.  

1 

 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall, concerning the recommendations in the 2022 Rule of Law Report, Denmark has made:  

  Some progress on ensuring adequate human and financial resources for the justice system 

in the next multiannual framework. 

  Some progress on adopting a new legislation on political party financing that will address 
the issue of multiple and anonymous donations and introduce sanctions for breaching the 
rules on the political parties’ framework. 

  No progress on introducing rules on ‘revolving doors’ for ministers and on lobbying and 
ensure  adequate  control  of  asset  declarations  submitted  by  persons  entrusted  with  top 
executive functions.  

  No  further  progress  on  the  process  to  reform  the  Access  to  Public  Administrative 
Documents  Act  in  order  to  strengthen  the  right  to  access  documents,  in  particular  by 
limiting the grounds for rejection of disclosure requests, taking into account the European 
standards on access to official documents. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, it 
is recommended to Denmark to: 

  Ensure  adequate  human  and  financial  resources  for  the  justice  system  in  the  next 
multiannual framework, building on the increases in 2023, taking into account European 
standards on resources for the justice system. 
Introduce rules  on ‘revolving doors’ for ministers and on lobbying  and ensure adequate 
control of asset declarations submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions. 
  Ensure  the  collection  of  data  on  investigations  and  prosecutions  of  corruption-related 

 

offences at national and local level. 

  Advance with the process to reform the Access to Public Administrative Documents Act in 
order to strengthen the right to access documents, in particular by limiting the grounds for 
rejection of disclosure requests, taking into account the European standards on access to 
official documents.  

2 

 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The Danish justice system consists of 24 district courts, two high courts (courts of appeal) and 
a  Supreme  Court,  as  well  as  two  specialised  courts1.  The  independent  National  Court 
Administration is in charge of the administration and development of the courts, which includes 
allocation of courts’ budgets and management of buildings and systems related to information 
and communications technology. The independent Judicial Appointments Council2 makes non-
binding proposals for the appointment of judges to the Ministry of Justice, who then proposes 
them for formal appointment by the executive (the Queen)3. Only one judge is proposed per 
vacancy by the Appointments Council. There have been no cases where the executive did not 
follow the proposal of the Appointments Council4. Disciplinary measures for judges can be 
issued by Court Presidents or the Special Court of Indictment and Revision5. The prosecution 
service is an autonomous institution acting under the supervision of the Ministry of Justice and 
led by a Prosecutor General6. The Bar and Law Society is the independent body governing the 
legal profession and ensuring its independence7. 

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Denmark continues to be very high among 
both the general public and companies. Overall, 86% of the general population and 85% of 
companies perceived the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ 
in 20238. According to data in the 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard, the level remains consistently 
very high for both the general public and companies since 2016. The level of perceived judicial 
independence among the general public has increased in comparison with 2022 (84%) but it is 
lower than in 2016 (88%). The level of perceived judicial independence among companies has 
decreased in comparison with 2022 (87%) although it is slightly higher than in 2016 (84%). 

1   The  Maritime  and  Commercial  Court  and  the  Land  Registration  Court.  CEPEJ  (2021),  Study  on  the 
functioning of the judicial systems in the EU Member States. Denmark does not have a constitutional court. 
2   Members are appointed by the Minister of Justice and consist of one Supreme Court and one High Court judge 
proposed by the respective courts, one District Court judge proposed by the Danish Association of Judges, one 
lawyer proposed by the Bar and Law Society and two representatives of the general public proposed by Local 
Government Denmark and the Danish Adult Education Association.  

3   With  the  exception  of  the  President  of  the  Supreme  Court,  who  is  selected  and  appointed  directly  by  the 
Supreme Court according to an internal procedure. In addition, as regards members of the Supreme Court, the 
law sets out a special procedure under which the candidate chosen by the appointments board is vetted by 
judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  before  the  appointment  is  confirmed.  According  to  the  2023  EU  Justice 
Scoreboard, the percentage of women in the top judicial positions is below 30%. Figure 36, 2023 EU Justice 
Scoreboard. 

4   For transparency, the Judicial Appointments Council issues a press release when making their proposal. 
5   2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 2.  
6   The Prosecutor General is appointed by the executive (formally the Queen) on recommendation of the Minister 
of Justice following approval of the Governments’ Recruitment Board and can be dismissed on a motivated 
recommendation of the Minister of Justice (in the latter case the recommendation is submitted directly to the 
Queen). The Minister of Justice can issue instructions to prosecutors in individual cases, with a number of 
safeguards applicable. 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law of situation in Denmark, 
p. 3.  

7   Administration of Justice Act, Chapter 15.  
8   Figures 49 and 51, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as follows: very low (below 30% of respondents perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); 
low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3 

 
                                                           
Quality  

The  Danish  courts  are  rolling  out  a  multi-year  project  for  an  IT  system  to  process 
criminal and probate cases. Some of the shortcomings as regards digitalisation identified in 
the 2022 Rule of Law Report9 have improved as regards civil cases10. Digital communication 
tools for courts and the prosecution service are in place11, procedural rules for digital tools are 
fully  in  place  for  civil  proceedings,  but  only  partly  for  administrative  and  criminal 
proceedings12  and  digital  solutions  to  initate  and  follow  administrative  and  criminal 
proceedings  remain  very  limited13.  As  already  noted  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  the 
National  Courts  Administration  is  developing  a  new  IT  system  for  processing  criminal  and 
probate cases, which will be rolled out in successive phases by 2026 and replace the legacy IT 
systems used by the courts with a more user-friendly, effective, and future-proof solution14. As 
part  of  that  project,  the  probate  portal  supporting  the  registration  of  claims  concerning  the 
administration  of  the  estate  of  the  deceased  has  been  rolled  out  in  November  2022  and  the 
second phase concerning the handling of uncontested fines was released in June 202315.  

There has been some progress towards ensuring adequate human and financial resources 
for the justice system, yet the impact of the resources issue on the length of proceedings 
is a concern. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended to Denmark to “ensure adequate 
human and financial resources for the justice system in the next multiannual framework, taking 
into account European standards on resources for the justice system”16. As noted in the 2022 
Rule of Law Report, in recent years the Danish courts have experienced an increase of pending 
cases and processing times, which may require a longer term increase of resources17. In 2022, 
the budgetary resources allocated to the Danish courts were approximately EUR 261.8 million 
(DKK  1 948.9  million),  a  figure  that  remains  stable  compared  to  202118.  However,  the 

9   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 4.  
10   Figure 45, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard 
11   Figures 43-44, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
12   Figure 41, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  In this  context,  it has been possible to use telecommunication  via 
video link for certain court functions since 2016, when the Administration of Justice Act's rules on extension 
of custody  hearing  with the use of video link have  been changed. It is the general rule that the prosecutor 
participates in the hearings via video link. In practice, this means that the judge is at the court, the prosecutor 
at his or her office and the defence attorney at either the prison/detention centre with the detained person or at 
the court house. Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 10. 

13   Figures 45-46, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
14   The budget for the project is approximately EUR 81.2 million (DKK 604.6 million). 2022 Rule of Law Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 4, and input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of 
Law Report, p. 10.  

15   The project phases will be rolled out progressively until 2026: the probate portal (phase 1), a fine case system 
for  processing  uncontested  fine  cases  from  the  Police  Administrative  Centre  (phase  2),  compulsory 
liquidations (phase 3), death cases, spousal separation and cashiering (phase 4), and criminal cases and for 
bankruptcy cases, debt relief and reconstruction (phase 5). National Courts  Administration (2023) Revised 
plan  for  digitisation  of  criminal  and  probate  areas  and  information  received  from  the  National  Courts 
Administration during the country visit. 

16   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, pp. 4-5. 
17   2022 Rule of Law Report,  Country Chapter on the  rule of law  situation in Denmark, p. 4, and input  from 

Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 4-5.  

18   In 2022, the total financial resources for the  judiciary have increased to approximately  EUR 261.8 million 
(DKK 1 948.9 million) compared to approximately EUR 259.32 million (DKK 1 930.3 million) in 2021. In 
2022, there were 2 079 full-time employees, including 697 judges and other legal advisers, and 1 189 office 
staff (in 2021, the figures were 686 and 1 179 respectively). Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law 
Report, p. 9. 

4 

 
                                                           
expenditure  on  the  justice  system  as  a  percentage  of  GDP  remains  very  low  (at  0.16%  of 
GDP)19 as does the number of judges per 100 000 inhabitants (at 6.6 per 100 000 inhabitants)20. 
The previous Government proposed to extend the judiciary’s budget from 2022 into the 2023 
budget  proposal21.  However,  in  March  2023,  the  Government  made  an  ad  hoc  additional 
allocation of approximately EUR 4.32 million (DKK 32.2 million) to combat the backlog of 
cases until the adoption of a new multiannual framework on resources22. While stakeholders 
welcomed the additional resources, they emphasised the need for a long-term solution23. In the 
meantime,  the  Ministry  of  Finance  and  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  together  with  the  National 
Courts  Administration24,  are  trying  to  establish  the  future  financial  needs  for  the  Danish 
courts25. The negotiations on the financial needs of the Danish courts at political level were 
planned already in spring 202226, but had subsequently been postponed27. Instead, the Ministry 
of  Justice  appointed  in  September  2022  a  committee,  chaired  by  a  former  Supreme  Court 
President,  to  examine  measures  that  could  make  the  courts  more  efficient  and  reduce  case 
processing times28. The Government’s ambition is to negotiate a new multiannual agreement 
in 2023 with the political parties that can take effect on 1 January 202429. According to a study 

19   Figure 33, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
20   Figure 35, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
21   According  to  the  Danish  authorities,  the  previous  Government  proposed  to  make  an  extension  of  the 
judiciary’s budget from 2022 to 2023 in the 2023 budget proposal, which was intended to ensure stability of 
the judiciary’s budget in 2023 and provide sufficient time to gather the necessary knowledge and decision-
making basis for a new multi-year agreement. Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 6. 
22   Ministry of Justice (2023) Government: Extraordinary funding to combat the backlog of cases in the courts in 

the run-up to new multi-year agreement. 

23   Danish Bar and Law Society considered that the ad hoc allocation was an important first step, while noting 
that according to its estimates for 2023 DKK 56 million would be needed to start providing  the additional 
judges and staff and the level of capacity to absorb them. Bar and Law Society (2023) Finance law paves the 
way to reduce court waiting times. In Justitia’s view, the allocated amount will not in itself solve the length of 
proceedings in Danish courts and stresses that the reduction in the length of proceedings must observe legal 
certainty  and  right  to  a  fair  trial.  Altinget  (2023),  Justitia:  More  video  conferencing  and  fewer  judges  can 
reduce case processing time in courts.  

24   According to the National Courts Administration, last year the Danish courts reported a deficit of almost DKK 
10 million of the total budget. In 2022 and 2023, the courts have received additional appropriations targeted 
at combating backlogs, but this was not enough to solve the structural challenges with case processing times 
and reverse the trend. The National Courts Administration considered that there was a need for a long-term 
plan and an ambitious multiannual agreement to provide the courts with the necessary additional resources to 
be able to hire more judges, assistant judges and clerical staff as well as to increase courtroom capacity and 
support  stable  and  secure  IT  operations.  National  Court  Administration  (2023),  Long  processing  times 
continued in 2022. 

25   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit. 
26   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 5. 
27   According to the Danish Institute for Human Rights, the political negotiations on a new multiannual agreement 
for the Danish courts were planned for autumn 2022 between the previous Government and the parliamentary 
parties. However, the negotiations were postponed until 2023 in view of the parliamentary elections held on 1 
November 2022. Simultaneously with the postponement of the negotiations, the Ministry of Justice appointed 
the committee with former Supreme Court President Thomas Rørdam. Contribution from the Danish Human 
Rights Institute via ENNHRI for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 189-190. 

28   The  work  of  the  committee  is  supposed  to  support  the  political  debate  on  the  courts  by  identifying  and 
qualifying actions to address the challenges facing the courts. The committee will not address all elements of 
the political negotiations, but only those actions that require specific legal and judicial analysis. Ministry of 
Justice (2022), New committee headed by Thomas Rørdam to support political  negotiations on courts. The 
committee published reports in April,  May and June. Danish Parliament (2023), Committee on Legal Affairs, 
Annexes 147, 185 and 212. 

29   Written  contribution  received  from  the  Danish  Ministry  of  Justice  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to 

Denmark. 

5 

 
                                                           
commissioned  by  the  Danish  Bar  Council  and  endorsed  by  the  Judges’  Association, 
approximately EUR 188.08 million (DKK 1.4 billion) in additional funding would be needed 
to address the long waiting times by 2030, whereby the district and high courts would need 64 
additional judges30; if no additional resources were to be allocated, the case processing times 
would  presumably  at  least  double  by  203031.  In  its  coalition  paper,  published  in  December 
2022,  the  Government  parties  stated  that  they  want  to  reduce  long  waiting  times  in  Danish 
courts by, among others, simplifying legal proceeding; no reference was made to the situation 
on the lack of resources32. Since the last report, the Danish courts have experienced an increase 
of pending cases and case processing times in 2022, notably for civil and criminal cases33. The 
Copenhagen district court, the largest first instance court, issued a press release in January 2023 
stating  that  in  view  of  its  financial34  and  personnel  situation  as  well  as  the  growing  case 
numbers, many cases would have to be re-scheduled to 2024 or later35, while the district court 
in Aarhus in October 2022 needed on average 28 months for civil cases36. As the Government 
has  made  an  ad  hoc  financial  allocation  for  2023  while  the  preparatory  work  to  facilitate  a 
political agreement on human and financial resources in the next multiannual framework for 
the  justice  system  is  ongoing,  it  is  concluded  that  there  has  been  some  progress  on  the 
implementation of the recommendation in the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  

The review of the legal aid system commenced in 2020 has been put on hold.  The pre-
legislative committee set up in April 2020 to review the existing legal aid system was initially 
due to present its results by summer 2022, but the expected deadline was subsequently moved 
to  summer  2023  due  to  the  pandemic37.  As  noted  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  this 
committee had been set up by the Ministry of Justice in response to a number of studies by 
stakeholders highlighting certain weaknesses in the functioning of the legal aid system and is 
composed  of  representatives  of  different  relevant  Ministries  and  authorities,  experts  and  is 
assisted  by  a  follow-up  group  providing  experience  from  practitioners38.  However,  the 
committee had not met since May 202239. While in February 2023, its mandate was to be re-

30   The Danish Bar Council, a body within the Bar and Law Society, has commissioned a study to investigate 
what additional funding would be required if courts were to reduce case processing times to a reasonable level 
by  2030.  Copenhagen  Economics  (2022),  Judiciary  at  breaking  point:  What  will  it  cost  to  reduce  case 
processing times?. 

31   Copenhagen Economics (2022), Judiciary at breaking point: What will it cost to reduce case processing times?, 

p. 11-12. 

32   Danish Government (2022), Responsibility for Denmark, p. 49 and input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of 

Law Report, p. 43-44. 

33   See also information in the 'Efficiency’ section and National Court Administration (2023), Long processing 

times continued in 2022. 

34   The situation of the Copenhagen district court was not expected to improve even once the financial bill for 
2023 was passed in Parliament. Information received from the Ministry of Justice and the Judges’ Association 
in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 

35   Copenhagen district court (2023), Case processing times at Copenhagen City Court increase and information 

received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark.  

36   Jyllands Posten (2022), Commentary: Waiting times at courts must be brought down significantly. 
37   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark and 2022 Rule 
of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 6. In terms of facilitating access 
to justice  and based on the 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard, further  specific arrangements related to access to 
justice could be introduced for persons at risk of discrimination and elderly persons, and for victims of violence 
against women/domestic violence. Figures 27 and 28, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

38   2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 4-5.  
39   See also statement of committee chairman in Advokatwatch (2023) Long-awaited legal aid and free legal aid 
committee is idle: “It's a scandal”. In Justitia's view, it is urgent to proceed with the reform work on the Danish 

6 

 
                                                           
confirmed after the election held in November 202240, in March 2023, its work was put on hold 
by the Ministry of Justice41, which was seen critically by some stakeholders42. According to 
the  Danish  authorities,  once  an  agreement  on  the  multiannual  financial  framework  for  the 
judiciary has been finalised, it is expected that the framework for the pre-legislative committee 
will be reviewed and the work continued43. 

Efficiency 

The average case handling times for district courts, notably on civil and criminal cases, 
continues to increase. The number of incoming civil, commercial, administrative and other 
cases at first instance in 2021 remained very high (46.3 cases per 100 000 inhabitants compared 
to 47.5 cases in 2020)44 with Denmark simultaneously having the second-lowest number of 
judges  as  compared  to  other  Member  States  (6.6  judges  per  100 000  inhabitants)45. 
Furthermore, the estimated time needed to resolve litigious civil and commercial cases at first 
instance has significantly increased from 190 days in 2020 to 238 days in 202146. In addition, 
the rate of resolving litigious civil and commercial cases has noticeably dropped from 111% in 
2020 to 97.6% in 202147. According to the National Courts Administration, the average case 
processing times in 2022 increased in the district courts for criminal cases, notably in the most 
serious criminal cases48. The increasing case processing times in criminal cases were deemed 
to have had a knock-on effect on case processing times in civil cases49. In February 2023, the 
Judges’ Association and the Bar and Law Society called attention to the increasingly longer 
processing times by noting that for several courts the hearings calendar was booked for more 
than two years in advance50.  

legal aid model, which was already significantly delayed. Justitia (2023), Status Report: Legal Certainty 2022, 
p. 17. 

40   Written contribution and information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit 

to Denmark. 

41   According to the Ministry of Justice, no meeting activity in the pre-legislative committee on legal aid was 
expected until the adoption of a new multiannual framework on resources for the judiciary, which was due to 
a  spike  in  the  workload  caused  by  the  ongoing  negotiations  of  that  multiannual  framework.  Written 
contribution received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 

42   Advokatwatch (2023) Minister overhears protests and puts legal aid committee  on hold and Justitia (2023) 

Timeline: Pre-legislative committee on legal aid and free trial has been postponed again. 

43   Written contribution received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
44   Figure  2,  2023  EU  Justice  Scoreboard. This  category  includes  all  civil  and  commercial  litigious  and  non-
litigious cases, non-litigious land and business registry cases, other registry cases, other non-litigious cases, 
administrative law cases and other non-criminal cases. 

45   Figure 35, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
46   Figure 6, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
47   Figure 11, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
48   The processing times of the courts have increased significantly in recent years, and the processing times were 
still long in 2022. In serious criminal cases, the processing times have almost doubled since 2018. While the 
processing times in jury cases decreased marginally, the processing time for cases with lay judges, which are 
among the most serious criminal cases, increased from 7.3 months in 2021 to 8.4 months in 2022. National 
Court Administration (2023), Long processing times continued in 2022. 

49   In ordinary civil cases with main hearing, the average length of proceedings in the district courts increased 
from 20.6 months in 2021 to 22 months in 2022. In 2018, those types of cases took an average of 16.8 months. 
National Court Administration (2023), Long processing times continued in 2022. 

50   In Aarhus District Court, an average civil case was suggested to take 28 months to be dealt with and that there 
are several courts that will be dealing with criminal cases in 2024. Berlingske Tidende (2023), Commentary: 
You can't come before a judge. The calendar system can't set a date that far in the future. 

7 

 
                                                           
The Government has introduced a new prioritisation model of criminal cases, aimed at a 
more uniform prioritisation. Until February 2023, a prioritisation of certain criminal cases in 
Danish courts applied to cases related to violence, weapons, and rape (“VVV cases”)51. The 
Parliament agreed to replace the former prioritising of VVV-cases with cases focused on harm 
to individuals (“PFK cases”), which include more cases than the VVV-definition e.g. homicide, 
arson, or robbery52. In that context, a contemporary priority model for 2023 has been agreed 
with the Courts of Denmark, which implies that the courts will prioritise the most serious PFK-
cases53. The VVV-cases prioritisation was considered by the Danish Bar and Law Society as 
being to the detriment of other – notably civil – cases54. In addition, as reported in the 2022 
Rule of Law Report, legislative initiatives to streamline and avoid delays in the handling of 
criminal  cases  had  been  proposed  and  adopted55.  However  the  Danish  Institute  for  Human 
Rights and Justitia voiced the concern that initiatives aimed at reducing courts’ case processing 
times should not lead to deterioration of rule of law in the justice system56.  

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The Danish anti-corruption system is to  a large extent based on general rules on ethics and 
integrity  as  well  as  social  norms  and  public  scrutiny.  Various  authorities  are  involved  in 
preventing corruption, promoting good administrative practice and compliance with the legal 
framework.  This  includes  amongst  others  the  National  Audit  Office.  The  Employee  and 
Competence Agency and the Prime Minister’s Office have responsibilities with regard to the 
promotion  of  integrity  among  civil  servants  and  ministers.  The  Ministry  of  Justice  ensures 
cooperation between national authorities in elaborating anti-corruption measures. The National 
Special  Crime  Unit  (SCU),  functional  since  January  2022,  has  both  investigative  and 
prosecution competences and the State Prosecutor for Special Crime (SPSCU), among others, 
supervises  SCU’s  complex  criminal  proceedings,  and  conducts  legality  control  and  appeals 
before the high courts.  

The perception among experts and the business community is that Denmark is one of the 
least  corrupt  countries  in  the  world.  In  the  2022  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  by 
Transparency International, Denmark scores 90/100 and ranks 1st in the European Union and 

51   The so-called VVV-cases related to violence, weapons and rape have a priority in the judicial system and need 
to be dealt with within 30 days. Information received from the Judges Association and Justitia in the context 
of the country visit to Denmark. 

52   With the political agreement regarding the financing of the Police and the Prosecution Service for the years 
2021-2023 the Parliament agreed to replace the former prioritising of VVV-cases. The PFK-definition does 
not include weapon felonies. To ensure a joint prioritising of PFK-cases across the criminal chain, the Prisons 
and Probation Service has been prioritising PFK-cases instead of VVV-cases since 2022. Written contribution 
by the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 

53   Ibid. 
54   Danish judges deal both  with civil and criminal cases and thus the prioritisation of specific criminal cases 

imposed by law had an impact on the handling of civil cases.  

55   For example, by limiting the defendants’ free choice of attorney in criminal cases related to certain types of 
offences, if their request of attorney would result in a delay of the proceedings. 2022 Rule of Law Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 6-7 and input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of 
Law Report, p. 12. 

56   Contribution from the Danish Human Rights Institute via ENNHRI for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 191 

and Justitia (2023), Status Report: Legal Certainty 2022, p. 16. 

8 

 
                                                           
globally57.  This  perception  has  been  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five  years58.  The  2023 
Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  21%  of  respondents  consider  corruption 
widespread in their country (EU average 70%) and 5% of respondents feel personally affected 
by  corruption  in  their  daily  lives  (EU  average  24%)59.  As  regards  businesses,  19%  of 
companies  consider  that  corruption  is  widespread  (EU  average  65%)  and  7%  consider  that 
corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  35%)60.  Furthermore,  27%  of 
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from  corrupt 
practices  (EU  average  32%)61,  while  51%  of  companies  believe  that  people  and  businesses 
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 30%)62.  

The  strategic  and  institutional  framework  in  the  fight  against  corruption  in  Denmark 
remains  based  mainly  on  general  rules  on  ethics  and  integrity.  The  Danish  authorities 
consider that the existing anti-corruption system, based on general rules on ethics and integrity, 
social norms and public scrutiny works well, and does not require a dedicated anti-corruption 
strategy63. Therefore, Denmark still does not  have such strategy64, nor a specialised agency 
dealing with anti-corruption issues. Coordination of anti-corruption-related activities is carried 
out through ad-hoc written consultations65. While the new Government that took up its duties 

57   Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2022, pp. 2-3. The level of perceived corruption is 
categorised  as  follows:  low  (the  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public  sector 
corruption scores above 79); relatively low (scores between 79-60), relatively high (scores between 59-50), 
high (scores below 50). 

58   In 2018 the score was 88, while, in 2022, the score is 90. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

59   Special Eurobarometer 534 on Corruption (2023). The Eurobarometer data on citizens’ corruption perception 

and experience is updated every year. The previous data set is the Special Eurobarometer 523 (2022). 

60   Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023). The Eurobarometer 
data  on  business  attitudes  towards  corruption  as  is  updated  every  year.  The  previous  data  set  is  the  Flash 
Eurobarometer 507 (2022). 

61   Special Eurobarometer 534 on Corruption (2023).  
62   Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023).  
63  Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from the Ministry of Justice. As a result, 
according to the OECD public integrity indicators on the quality of the strategic framework, Denmark is below 
the  OECD  average  scoring  ‘0’  for  evidence  based,  quality  of  strategy,  adequacy  of  implementation  plan, 
implementation  rates,  financial  sustainability,  evaluation  practices  reaching  the  OECD  average  only  on 
consultation in practice. At the same time, the trust in Parliament is above the OECD average (51 out of 100), 
legislative stability 59 out of 100 and consultation of draft law scores 100 out of 100. OECD (2023), OECD – 
Public Integrity Indicators. 

64   While the existence of a national strategy is not an international legal requirement, specifically in the context 
of foreign bribery Denmark was recommended to develop a comprehensive national strategy on combating 
foreign bribery encompassing prevention, detection, awareness-raising, and enforcement, in order to ensure 
foreign bribery is given appropriate priority. The strategy should incorporate the activities of the public, private 
and NGO sectors, be based on an assessment of the foreign-bribery risks faced by Danish companies. OECD 
(2023), Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Phase 4 Report: Denmark, p. 11.  

65  Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry 
of Justice is responsible for legislation on corruption, guidelines on good behaviour for civil servants and  is 
responsible to answer questions from Parliament in relation to corruption. Also, the Ministry of Justice is to 
be a focal point in contact with foreign authorities and in general responsible for the enforcement of criminal 
law legislation, for example bribery and fraud, since the Minister of Justice has the general oversight of the 
police and prosecutors.   

9 

 
                                                           
on 15 December 2022 made a political commitment to transparency66, no specific new steps in 
this regard has been taken so far67. 

The new national investigative unit responsible for serious crimes is tasked with complex 
corruption-related cases. The 2022 reform creating the National Special Crime Unit (SCU)68 
as  well  as  the  State  Prosecutor  for  Special  Crime  Unit  (SPSCU)  is  perceived  as  being 
implemented  successfully69.  The  law  enforcement  authorities  welcome  placing  the  fight 
against  financial  and  economic  crime  structurally  closer  to  services  competent  to  fight 
organised crime due to tight links between them70. Resources available and training for officials 
are adequate to fulfil the tasks assigned to them71.  

General  reporting  on  the  handling  of  corruption-related  offences  is  still  lacking.  The 
authorities  underline  that  the  corruption-related  cases  have  remained  rare  over  time72.  The 
collected statistics are limited to cases of bribery. The National Special Crime Unit (SCU) and 
the State Prosecutor for Special Crime Unit (SPSCU), focusing mainly on complex cases and 
those demanding international co-operation, received one report on bribery in 2022, which is 
currently being investigated73. At the same time, the available data indicate that in 2022 there 
were  68  judgments  on  active  and  passive  bribery  (a  significant  increase  compared  to  8 
judgements in 2021)74. Concerns were raised on the lack of overall statistics on corruption as, 
due to the lack of a reporting mechanism, the efficacy of the repressive system remains difficult 
to evaluate75. It is particularly difficult to assess the volume of corruption-related cases handled 
at the local level as such data is not specifically collected. The issue of monitoring and reporting 
has also been raised in relation to foreign bribery where the OECD recommended that Denmark 
put in place proactive media monitoring processes to detect potential cases, as the authorities 
reportedly did not address the allegations of foreign bribery reported in the media76. According 
to the National Audit Office, risks and challenges related to corruption can potentially derive 
from lack of transparency and ineffective systems of control77.  

66  Danish Government (2022), Responsibility for Denmark. 
67   Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from the Ministry of Justice. 
68   Currently the National Special Crime Unit is composed of 5 investigators, 1 superintendent, 4 prosecutors and 
1 administrative assistant. Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from SCU and 
SPSCU. 

69   Information received from Ministry of Justice, SCU and SPSCU in the context of the country visit in Denmark. 
70  Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from SCU and SPSCU.  
71  Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from the Ministry of Justice. 
72  Information received from the Prosecution Service in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
73  Information received from the SCU as well as the SPSCU in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
74   The figures are available only for final judgments regarding bribery cases gathered for complex cases dealt 
with at the central level. More specifically, there were 33 judgments passed in 2022 (compared to six in 2021) 
based on the Criminal Code section 122 (active bribery), 35 judgments passed in 2022 (compared to two in 
2021) based on Criminal Code section 144 (passive bribery), one judgment passed in 2022 (compared to five 
in 2021) based on the Criminal Code section 299 (private sector bribery). Input from Denmark for the 2023 
Rule of Law Report, p. 16 and written contribution from the Prosecution Service in the context of the country 
visit to Denmark. 

75   Information received in the context of the country visit to Denmark from Transparency International. 
76   OECD (2023), Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Phase 4 Report: Denmark, p. 13. 
77   Written contribution received from the National Audit Office in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
The Flash Eurobarometer on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU shows that 15% of companies 
in Denmark (EU average 26%) think that corruption has prevented them from winning a public tender or a 
public  procurement  contract  in  practice  in  the  last  three  years.  Flash  Eurobarometer  524  on  Businesses’ 
attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023). 

10 

 
                                                           
Foreign bribery cases are insufficiently investigated and prosecuted. There are currently 
two ongoing cases concerning foreign bribery in relation to Danish companies78. Overall, the 
OECD raised concerns about Denmark’s overall efforts to enforce the foreign bribery offence. 
In particular, it points to a lack of proactive assessment of foreign bribery allegations brought 
by  other  sources  which  are  said  to  be  underexploited79.  According  to  the  OECD,  law 
enforcement  authorities are not  using the full range of investigative techniques available or 
routinely seeking evidence from foreign authorities, and several investigations were terminated 
prematurely80.  The  corporate  liability  framework  is  not  being  applied  comprehensively,  in 
particular  in  relation  to  foreign  subsidiaries  of  Danish  companies.  As  no  financial 
investigations  are  conducted  in  bribery  cases,  Denmark’s  capacity  to  confiscate  bribes  or 
proceeds of foreign bribery or pursue foreign bribery-related money laundering is negatively 
impacted81.  Both  Transparency  International  and  OECD  raise  concerns  that  enforcement 
bodies  do  not  have  sufficient  resources  to  investigate  foreign  bribery  cases82,  which  is 
especially  problematic  in  view  of  Danish  companies  being  vulnerable  to  foreign  bribery83. 
Furthermore, recommendations of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) in relation 
to  the legislative  framework remain unaddressed84 and, according to  OECD, it  is  unclear if 
foreign bribery sanctions are effective, proportionate, and dissuasive85.  

Some  progress  has  been  achieved  on  political  party  financing.  The  2022  Rule  of  Law 
Report recommended to Denmark to “adopt new legislation on political party financing that 
will  address  the  issue  of  multiple  and  anonymous  donations  and  introduce  sanctions  for 
breaching  the  rules  on  the  political  parties  framework”86.  The  new  law  concerning  public 
financing of political parties was adopted on 30 May and it will enter into force on 1 January 

78   The first foreign bribery conviction in Denmark was in 2019, which was imposed against a Danish company 
through a non-trial resolution. At the time, the fine sought was the largest ever by the State Prosecutor for 
Serious  Economic  and  International  Crimes  (SØIK)  for  economic  crimes.  Two  foreign  bribery  cases  are 
ongoing. In one case, Denmark is jointly investigating with the passive-side country. OECD (2023) Working 
Group on Bribery, Phase 4 evaluation of Denmark, p. 4, 86.  

79   According to OECD, the main sources of detection are the media monitoring, self-reports, foreign authorities, 
and international organisations which remain beyond the radar of the Danish authorities. Since the Convention 
entered into force in Denmark on 4 November 2000, there have been approximately 30 allegations of bribery 
of foreign public officials implicating Danish companies or citizens. Danish companies have been sanctioned 
in only two cases. A natural person has never been sanctioned for foreign bribery, and Denmark has never 
taken a foreign bribery case to trial. Most foreign bribery allegations (23) were either not investigated (8) or 
Danish authorities terminated the investigation without prosecution (15). Denmark discontinued prosecutions 
in three cases. OECD (2023) Working Group on Bribery, Phase 4 evaluation of Denmark, p. 9, 11-12. 

80   OECD (2023) Working Group on Bribery, Phase 4 evaluation of Denmark, p. 4. 
81   OECD (2023) Working Group on Bribery, Phase 4 evaluation of Denmark, p. 4-5. 
82   Also, Denmark is classified as ‘limited or no enforcement’ for investigations and cases 2018-2021 which is a 
decrease  in  relation  to  the  previous  classification  for  years  2016-2019  when  referred  to  as  ‘limited’; 
Transparency  International  (2022),  Exporting  Corruption  2022  Report.  OECD  (2023),  Implementing  the 
OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Phase 4 Report: Denmark, p. 11.  

83   According to OECD, Danish companies are internationally active having exports or investments abroad and 
may be prone to foreign bribery. OECD (2023), Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Phase 4 
Report: Denmark, p. 8, 9, 11.  

84   As regards foreign bribery, GRECO reiterates its concern that it has not been made clear beyond any doubt 
that  all  forms  of  “undue  advantages”  are  covered  by  the  relevant  bribery  offences  concerning  foreign  and 
international public officials. GRECO Third Evaluation Round – Addendum to the second compliance report 
on Denmark, p. 4.  

85   OECD (2023), Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Phase 4 Report: Denmark, p. 11.   
86   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, pp. 10-11. 

11 

 
                                                           
202487. The main aims of this reform are to ensure that only political parties that were elected 
or almost elected receive public party funding and to introduce criminal sanctions for political 
parties  that  omit  to  submit  their  annual  accounts88.  Following  the  adoption  of  that  law,  the 
authorities plan to progress also on private party financing, highlighted as a priority area by 
GRECO89, the 2022 Rule of Law Report90 and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation 
in  Europe  (OSCE)91.  Private  party  financing  was  discussed  in  the  Parliament  and  an  initial 
negotiation meeting between the political parties took place in the beginning of June92. The 
exact scope and content of this initiative is not yet determined93. As new legislation on public 
political party financing has been adopted and the preparations of new legislation on private 
financing of political parties have started, there has been some progress on the implementation 
of the recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

There has been no progress achieved to introduce rules on revolving doors for ministers, 
on lobbying and on asset declarations submitted by persons entrusted with top executive 
functions. In the 2022 Rule of Law Report, Denmark was recommended to “introduce rules 
on  ‘revolving  doors’  for  ministers  and  on  lobbying,  and  ensure  adequate  control  of  asset 
declarations submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions”94. In the previous 
years,  GRECO  issued  various  recommendations  to  Denmark  to  enhance  the  integrity  for 
ministers and top executive functions95 as well as to address the lack of regulation regarding 
lobbying96 and revolving doors97. While the Danish authorities consider that the system works 

87   Written contribution received from the Ministry of Interior in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
88  Input received from Denmark to the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 14. 
89   GRECO remains concerned by the lack of progress in response to a number of recommendations aimed at 
enhancing  the  overall  transparency  of  political  financing  in  Denmark,  in  particular  to  introduce  a  ban  on 
anonymous donations to individual election candidates, to require more transparency as to the value of certain 
donations and to improve the supervision of political financing (which goes beyond the pure auditing of their 
accounts).  GRECO  also  recommended  to  ensure  independent  and  substantial  monitoring  in  respect  of  the 
funding of political parties and electoral campaigns.  GRECO recommended that yet-to-be-established rules 
on financing of political parties and electoral campaigns be accompanied by flexible sanctions, for example 
of  an  administrative  nature,  which  are  effective,  proportionate  and  dissuasive.  GRECO,  Third  Evaluation 
Round,  Second  Addendum  to  the  Second  Compliance  Report  on  Denmark.  According  to  GRECO  the 
Parliament plays a passive role in this regard and the State Audit body which is responsible to Parliament has 
never checked party accounts, and where  the  Ministry for Economic Affairs and the Interior (which is not 
independent as such) only checks the accounts with respect to state funding matters. GRECO Third Evaluation 
Round – Addendum to the second compliance report on Denmark. 

90  This  part  of  the  current  rules  concern  issues  raised  both  by  GRECO  and  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report 

recommendation as mentioned above. 

91   OSCE  observers  monitored  the  Danish  general  election  that  took  place  on  1  November  2022.  The 
recommendations of the report concern, among others, regulating anonymous donations and the sanctioning 
mechanisms. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (2023), Denmark Early General Elections, 
1 November 2022, ODIHR Election Expert Team Final Report, p. 17.  

92   Input received from Denmark to the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 
93  Information received from the Ministry of Interior in the context of the country visit to Denmark.  
94   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, pp. 9-10. 
95  According to GRECO declarations on assets submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions need 
to be subject to substantive control - GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Compliance Report, recommendation 
vii, pp. 9-10. 

96  According to GRECO, introduction of rules and guidance on lobbying is recommended with regard to contacts 
between persons entrusted with top executive functions and lobbyists. Overall, GRECO also underlined the 
need to increase the transparency of contacts and subject matters concerning lobbying of persons entrusted 
with top executive functions. GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round on Denmark – Compliance Report, pp. 7-8. 

97   GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report, p. 8. 

12 

 
                                                           
well and further strengthening of the rules in question is not necessary98, there is no verification 
and monitoring system in place for integrity risks. GRECO’s view that the current framework 
inadequately addresses integrity risks is shared by a stakeholder99 and the OECD indicators of 
accountability of public policy making remain very low100. As no specific action has been taken 
in  the  areas  of  revolving  doors  for  ministers,  lobbying  and  asset  declarations  for  persons 
entrusted with top executives functions, it can be concluded that there has been no progress on 
the implementation of the recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  

The new system on the protection of whistleblowers is in force and guidelines support the 
implementation of the legal framework . The Whistleblower Act101 entered into force on 17 
December 2021 and the general external reporting channel was established in the Danish Data 
Protection  Agency102.  In  2021,  three  sets  of  guidelines  were  issued  and  addressed  to 
whistleblowers, public autorities and companies103. The authorities report that the number of 
complaints  is  not  high  and  regular  guidance  is  provided  as  regards  the  functioning  of  the 
system104, even if a need for awareness-raising has been noted105.  

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM 

The Danish Constitution provides the overall framework for the protection of the freedom of 
expression. The tasks, organisational structure and rules of procedure of the national  media 
regulatory  authority,  the  Danish  Radio  and  Television  Board,  are  enshrined  in  law106. 
Secondary  legislation  also  provides  safeguards  for  the  independence  of  the  public  service 
broadcasters107. There are no specific laws pertaining to media concentration, transparency of 
media ownership, allocation of state advertising, editorial independence or ownership of media 
companies.  Access  to  documents  is  regulated  in  the  Access  to  Public  Administrative 
Documents Act of 2014108.  

The ethical rules for the press are being reviewed and the existing media self-regulatory 
system continues to be assessed in view of possible future updates. In Denmark, legislation 
provides that the content and conduct of mass media shall be in accordance with sound press 

98   Input received  from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of  Law  Report.  According to the Ministry of Justice it is 
sufficient that the declarations of ministers are published on the website of the Prime Minister’s Office and 
thereby  subject  to  scrutiny  by  Parliament,  the  press  and  the  public  at  large,  and  ministers  bear  political 
responsibility for this information. 

99  Contribution from Transparency International for the 2023 Rule of Law Report.  
100  According to the OECD accountability of public policy making indicators, Denmark remains under the OECD 
average as regards conflict of interest safeguards in practice, lobbying safeguards in practice (score 1 out of 
9) while post-employment integrity for ministers and top officials is not tracked.  

101  Law Nr 1436 from 29 June 2021 on the protection of whistleblowers.  
102  Website  of  the  whistleblower  channel  in  the  Danish  Data  Protection  Agency  available  in  English, 

https://whistleblower.dk/english. 

103  Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
104  Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
105  Contribution received from Transparency International in the context of the country visit to Denmark. 
106  The  Radio  and  Television  Broadcasting  Act,  Executive  Order  on  the  Radio  and  Television  Board  and  the 

Danish Public Administration Act. 

107  The Radio and Television Broadcasting Act and further regulation in connection with the Act; According to 
European Parliament’s Flash Eurobarometer: News & Media Survey 2022, Denmark is among top 6 Member 
States where citizens demonstrate the highest trust in public TV and radio stations (incl. online). 

108  Denmark ranks 3rd in the 2023 Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index compared to 2nd in the 

previous year. 

13 

 
                                                           
ethics  and  that  relevant  complaints  can  be  addressed  to  the  independent  Press  Council 
established by law109. Since June 2022, a working group composed of representatives of the 
media industry has been working110 to update the advisory rules of sound press ethics, which 
were  last  revised  in  2013111.  The  revision  should,  among  other  things,  take  into  account 
technological developments and create more openness about the working methods of editorial 
media. In line with the political Media Agreement for 2022-2025112, a committee has also been 
set up under the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Justice to examine the future role of 
the Danish Press Council and a possible creation of a new media ombudsperson to support it, 
as  explained  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report113.  The  same  committee  will  look  at  the 
possibilities to update the current framework for media liability to fit the digital media reality, 
including liabilities of influencers over the content that they upload online114.  

The  independence  of  the  national  regulatory  authority  and  public  service  media  have 
remained  stable.  Since  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  no  regulatory  changes  have  been 
reported regarding the media regulator - the Danish Radio and Television Board - or the two 
Danish  public service broadcasters, Danmarks Radio  (DR), TV 2 DANMARK A/S and the 
eight regional broadcasters115. Committee-level work has, however, been initiated with a view 
to  proposing  a new composition of the  DR’s  board of directors, ensuring  their professional 
competences and independence116. According to the Radio and Television Broadcasting Act 
and further regulation in connection with the Act, Danish public service media are organised 
as  independent  media  undertakings  and  the  State  cannot  interfere  with  their  programme 
services  or  administrative  and  financial  management117.  The  MPM  2023  regards  the 
independence  of  both  the  media  authority  and  the  public  service  media  to  carry  low  risk 
scores118. Since the 2022 Rule of Law Report, no regulatory changes regarding transparency 
of media ownership or restrictions to media ownership and concentration have been reported. 
The MPM 2023 considers the plurality of media providers to constitute a high risk due to a 
lack of media specific rules to prevent or limit concentration in the media sector119. 

No  further  progress  has  been  made  regarding  the  revision  of  the  Access  to  Public 
Administrative Documents Act. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended to Denmark to 
“continue the process geared at reforming the Access to Public Administrative Documents Act 
in order to strengthen the right to access documents, in particular by limiting the grounds for 
rejection of disclosure requests, taking into account the European standards on access to official 

109  Section 34 of the Media Liability Act – Consolidating Act 2018-12-27 no. 1719. 
110  Danske Medier  (2022)  Media industry  sets  up  working  group on updating press ethics rules  following the 

media agreement. 

111  Pressenaevnet, the Press Ethical Rules.  
112  Ministry of Culture (2022), Media Agreement for 2022-2025; following the formation of the new Government, 
the committee’s work has been re-confirmed in the subsequent Media agreement for 2023-2026. Ministry of 
Culture (2023) Media Agreement for 2023-2026,  p. 15. 

113  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 12. 
114  Ministry of Culture (2022) Minister for Culture appoints Media Responsibility Committee. 
115  Written  contribution  from  the  Radio  and  Television  Board  for  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report;  Input  from 

Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 17-18. 

116  Ministry of Culture (2023) Media Agreement for 2023-2026, p. 8. 
117  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 13. 
118  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Denmark, p. 12 and 22. 
119  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Denmark, p. 16. 

14 

 
                                                           
documents”. As noted in the 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports120, the Access to Public 
Administrative Documents Act, which establishes a set of rules for all public administration 
bodies and Ministries on public access to information and documents, continues to be subject 
to certain restrictions limiting public and journalistic access to specific governmental files, in 
particular  internal  working  documents  of  authorities  and  documents,  which  are  being 
exchanged at a time when a minister needs the advice and council of his staff121. Early elections 
delayed progress with regard to negotiations that were mandated by a Parliament resolution in 
2021122. A public consultation was held in summer 2022 and the newly formed Government 
has announced its intention to establish an expert committee to prepare a proposal123, but there 
is  not  yet  any  mandate  or  timeline  publicly  available.  Heads  of  associations  representing 
Danish  media  companies  and  journalists  have  called  upon  politicians  to  ensure  more 
transparency, as access to information continues to be restricted in relation to the operation of 
the administration124. As no concrete steps have been taken at this stage to reform the Access 
to Public Administrative Documents Act, no progress can be reported on the implementation 
of  the  recommendation  made  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report.  The  Parliamentary 
Ombudsperson notes that there have been a number of complaints from journalists regarding 
the long processing time of requests for acces to documents held particularly by the Ministry 
of Health125. 

The framework for the protection of journalists remains strong. Stakeholders consider the 
publication of the Danish national action plan on the safety of journalists mentioned in the 2022 
Rule of Law Report126 to be an important commitment from the state127. Since the 2022 Rule 
of Law Report, the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism and 
safety of journalism did not publish any alerts concerning Denmark128. No strategic lawsuits 
against public participation cases have been reported either129. Challenges for journalists are 
particularly linked to budgetary cuts in local and regional papers130. To address this, journalists 
have called for greater support from the Government in the renegotiated Media Agreement131. 

120  2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 10; 2021 Rule of Law 
Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 10; 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 13-14. 

121  Sections 19 to 33 and Section 35 of the Access to Public Administrative Documents Act. 
122  Danish Parliament (2021), Resolution on the convening of negotiations on the Danish Public Access Act; 2021 

Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 10. 

123  Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19. 
124  SN (2022) Openness is your only option to keep those in power at bay; Information received from the Danish 

Media Association and the Danish Union of Journalists in the context of the country visit to Denmark.  

125  Parliamentary Ombudsman (2023), Annual Report 2022, p. 5-6. 
126  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 14. 
127  Only  a  few  reports  of  harassment  and  threats  were  registered  since  the  publication  of  the  action  plan. 
Information received from the Danish Media Association and the Danish Union of Journalists in the context 
of the country visit to Denmark.  

128  Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists. 
129  Input  from  The  European  Federation  of  Journalists  for  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  23;  Information 
received  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  the  Danish  Union  of  Journalists,  the  Danish  Press  Council  and  the 
Danish Media Association in the context of the 2023 country visit to Denmark. 

130  Information received from the Danish Media Association and the Danish Union of Journalists in the context 

of the country visit to Denmark. 

131  Danish Union of Journalists (2022) Cuts cost many DJ members their jobs. 

15 

 
                                                           
At the same time, the MPM 2023 notes that journalists benefit from the protection of strong 
unions and social security net132. 

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Denmark  has  a  unicameral,  parliamentary  system  of  government,  in  which  both  the 
Government  and members of Parliament  can propose legislation, although draft bills  are in 
general  presented  by  the  Government.  In  the  absence  of  a  constitutional  court,  ex-post 
constitutionality review can be carried out by all courts in concrete cases133. The Parliamentary 
Ombudsperson provides oversight on decisions by public authorities and the Danish Institute 
for Human Rights monitors the respect of fundamental rights. 

The  working  procedures  of  the  Parliament  continue  to  be  underpinned  by  a  strong 
consensual culture and the current Government has committed to follow-up on a political 
agreement to strengthen Parliament's scrutiny of the Government. While Denmark has a 
tradition of minority Governments, safeguards exist also for the opposition minority134. The 
Danish  political  tradition  has  been  based  on  seeking  broad  political  consensus  and  the 
governing coalition has committed to continue doing so and to strengthen Parliament's control 
of  the  Government135.  As  noted  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  a  report  by  the  Standing 
Orders Committee from March 2021136 proposed a number of guidelines for the use of fast-
track proceedings and highlighted that draft legislation should contain a sunset clause137. For 
the  period  from  October  2021  until  October  2022138,  228  proposals  were  submitted  to 
Parliament, 26 of which were fast-tracked. During the ongoing Parliamentary session 2022-
2023, 12 legislative proposals passed through fast-track proceedings, with four of these having 
a sunset clause and a further three being temporary by their very nature139. The Government 

132  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Denmark, p. 12. 
133  This happens rarely and there has only been one case in which the Supreme Court decided to disapply a law 

for being incompatible with the Constitution that is the 1999, Tvind case, U 1999.841 H. 

134  The Danish parliamentary system provides the minority with specific safeguards, such as: a) one third of the 
members of Parliament (i.e. 60 members) can demand a referendum on a passed bill before it can become law, 
b)  72  members  of  Parliament  can  demand  the  postponement  of  the  third  reading  of  a  bill  until  at  least  12 
weekdays after the second reading, c) one third of the Parliament’s Scrutiny Committee can demand a pre-
investigation  in  that  committee,  or  d)  72  members  of  Parliament  may  demand  that  the  Speaker  summons 
Parliament for a sitting. Written contribution from the Danish Parliament Standing Orders Committee in the 
context of the country visit. 

135  Danish Government (2022), Responsibility for Denmark, p. 48. 
136  Standing Orders Committee (2021), Report concerning urgent consideration of government draft laws. 
137  Fast-track procedures are defined as legislative proposals whose processing time from the day after submission 
to the third reading in Parliament is less than 30 days.  The draft legislation should contain a sunset clause, 
leading to an act ceasing to apply, unless Parliament before that date has adopted a revision of the relevant 
provision. Nevertheless, there are exemptions to the use of the sunset clause, for example it is not necessary 
where the effect of the legislation according to its content is limited or specific well-founded circumstances 
require  an  absence  of  a  sunset  clause.  Furthermore,  if  there  has  been  no  consultation  due  to  extraordinary 
circumstances, Parliament needs to be provided with an explanation of the relevant circumstances. Input from 
Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 21 and the 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the 
rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 15. 

138  The sessional year of the Parliament runs from the first Tuesday of October until the first Tuesday of October 

the following year. 

139  Situation as on 20 April 2023. According to the Ministry of Justice, the large number of legislative proposals 
being  fast-tracked  during  the  Parliamentary  session  2022-2023  was  due  to  the  parliamentary  situation 
following the general election of 1 November 2022 and the formation of the new Government on 15 December 
2022. Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit. 

16 

 
                                                           
coalition announced in December 2022 that it will provide for fast-track legislative proposals 
to come with a sunset clause of six months, if it would serve a legitimate aim, so that such 
proposals would be re-examined under normal conditions if the law was to remain in force140. 
In addition, in October 2022, the previous Government announced an Agreement to strengthen 
Parliament's scrutiny of the Government and focus on trust in the political system141, which 
also included the setting up of a Democracy Committee142. The Democracy Committee should 
examine the division of responsibilities between ministers, the relationship between ministers 
and  civil  servants,  the  role  of  special  advisers  and  the  framework  for  the  work  of  the 
Government  and  the  civil  service143.  Following  the  elections  in  November  2022,  the  new 
Government  coalition  committed  to  follow-up  on  the  Agreement  to  strengthen  Parliament's 
scrutiny of the Government144.  

The  Parliamentary  Ombudsman  and  the  Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights  have 
continued  to  carry  out  their  mission  independently  and  with  adequate  resources.  The 
Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Institute for Human Rights, accredited with an A-Status145, 
continue  to  have  adequate  resources  and  have  not  experienced  any  challenges  to  their 
independence146. In terms of complaints received by the Parliamentary Ombudsman in 2022147, 

140  Danish Government (2022), Responsibility for Denmark, p. 49 and input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of 

Law Report, p. 21. 

141  The agreement foresaw the setting up of a Democracy committee, an obligation for the Government to consult 
the Parliament on decisions of an extraordinary nature in crisis situations, and a new dialogue with the citizens 
to restore confidence in the political system. The background have been public debates relating to a ruling by 
the Court of Impeachment relating to the accountability of a former minister in December 2021, the second 
report of the so-called Tibet Commission in March 2022 and the findings of the commission of scrutiny on the 
culling of mink in June 2022. The agreement was concluded between the Government, the Socialist People’s 
Party  (Socialistisk  Folkeparti),  the  Unity  List  party  (Enhedslisten),  Danish  Social  Liberal  Party  (Radikale 
Venstre), and the Alternative (Alternativet). Ministry of Justice (2022), Agreement on reviewing the political 
system and strengthening Parliament's scrutiny of the government and the 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 16 -17. 

142  The Democracy Committee was one of the measures announced already on 1 July 2022 in a press conference 
following the findings of the commission of scrutiny on the culling of mink. Prime Minister’s Office (2022), 
Press meeting on Friday, 1 July 2022. 

143  According to a mandate adopted in October 2022, the work would notably include: i) the organisation of the 
Government and its work in Government committees, ii) organisation and conduct of work across ministries 
and authorities in central government, iii) practices and framework for the work of the special advisers, iv) 
participation  of  special  advisers  in  Government  committees  and  related  work,  v)  framework  for  the  civil 
service's tasks in advising and assisting ministers, vi) civil service’s duty of obedience, in particular in the light 
of its duties of legality, truthfulness and professionalism, including the duty to inform and the right and duty 
to speak out,  vii)  civil  service's assistance to  ministers' use of social  media, or viii)  assistance by the civil 
service  to  ministers'  appearances  in  political  party  activities.  Ministry  of  Justice  (2022),  Mandate  for  the 
Committee on the organisation and framework for the work of Government and central administration. 

144  Danish Government (2022), Responsibility for Denmark, p. 49. 
145  The Danish Institute for Human Rights is the independent National Human Rights Institution accredited with 
A-Status by  the Global Alliance of National Human Rights  Institutions (GANHRI). Contribution from the 
Danish Human Rights Institute via ENNHRI for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 191. 

146  The  Parliament  allocated  approximately  EUR  12.8  million  (DKK  95.3  million)  in  annual  funding  of  the 
Ombudsman institution in  2022. Input from Denmark for the  2023 Rule of Law report, p.  23. Information 
received from the  Parliamentary Ombudsman  and the Danish Human Rights Institute in the context of the 
country visit. 

147  According to the Ombudsman’s data for 2022, the institution handled a total of 5 258 cases of which about 
15% led to an investigation (787 cases, of which 217 full investigations and 570 shortened investigations). 
Out of the 217 full investigations, 126 have led to criticism or recommendations. In 2022, the Parliamentary 
Ombudsman  opened  5 072  cases,  which  is  lower  by  comparison  to  5 643  cases  in  2021.  Parliamentary 

17 

 
                                                           
most complaints concerned measures related to children and family matters, social benefits and 
social  services,  environment  and  construction,  and  access  to  documents  held  by  public 
authorities148.  The  Parliamentary  Ombudsman’s  office  and  the  Danish  Institute  for  Human 
Rights  operate  without  experiencing  any  obstruction  or  refusal  to  cooperate  by  public 
authorities and their recommendations are being regularly followed-up on149.  

The civic space in Denmark remains open with a robust framework for the involvement 
of  civil  society  organisations.  The  civic  space  in  Denmark  continues  to  be  considered  as 
open150  and  provides  for  robust  mechanisms  for  the  involvement  of  civil  society 
organisations151.  As  a  general  rule,  the  operating  space  for  civil  society  organisations  is 
considered  safe  and  threats  linked  to  the  activities  of  civil  society  organisations  are  rarely 
observed152.  Nevertheless,  the  Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights  has  made  numerous 
recommendations  focused  on  the  risks  to  the  civic  space  posed  by  advanced  surveillance 
technologies used for police investigations or for intelligence services, possibly deterring civil 
society  actors  from  fully  using  their  freedom  of  expression153.  Some  civil  society  umbrella 
organisations have observed administrative obstacles in accessing financial services154 and, in 
September 2022, the Ministry of Culture published a survey report based on a mapping exercise 
of  bureaucratic  burdens  on  voluntary  organisations155.  While  the  overall  framework  for 
stakeholder  consultation  is  generally  considered  as  strong,  the  fact  of  occassionally  having 
short consultation periods156 was raised by some stakeholders157. The Government coalition 

Ombudsman  (2023),  Annual  report  2022,  p.  15  and  78,  and  information  received  from  the  Parliamentary 
Ombudsman in the context of the country visit. 

148  Parliamentary Ombudsman (2023), Annual report 2022, p. 13-19.  
149  Information  received  from  the  Parliamentary  Ombudsman  and  the  Danish  Human  Rights  Institute  in  the 

context of the country visit to Denmark. 

150  Rating  given  by  CIVICUS,  ratings  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed,  obstructed, 

repressed and closed.  

151  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark, p. 16.  
152  Information  received  from  the  Danish  Human  Rights  Institute,  Nyt  Europa,  Globalt  Fokus  and  Dansk 

Ungdoms Faellesraad in the context of the country visit. 

153  Contribution from the Danish Human Rights Institute via ENNHRI for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 193-

195. 

154  This relates to requirements for associations in opening and operating bank accounts due to the fight against 
financial crime, money laundering and terrorist financing, which had led to increased and stricter requirements 
in recent years. Information received from the Dansk Ungdoms Faellesraad in the context of the country visit. 
See also Various Danish umbrella associations (2021), Proposals to facilitate burdens on associations. 

155  The objective of the survey (2 470 respondents replying to the entire questionnaire) was to map how volunteers 
and association  workers experience regulations, procedures and other types of requirements that  taking up 
time and effort in the daily life of the association. The survey was designed in cooperation with a number of 
main  organisations  of  associations  (The  Danish  Sports  Federation,  DGI,  Danish  Corporate  Sport,  Danish 
Youth Council and Danish Folkeoplysnings Samråd). Ministry of Culture (2022), Report - Summary of results 
from questionnaire survey on Bureaucratic Burdens of Associations. 

156  In the period 13 July 2022 to 13 April 2023, there were 105 public consultations on bills. Out of those 105 
public consultations, 54  were shorter than  four  weeks. Out of these 54 bills, 40 legislative proposals  were 
subject to a consultation period shorter than 21 days, and 25 proposals were subject to a consultation period 
shorter than 14 days. Written contribution received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country 
visit to Denmark. 

157  The frequency of shorter consultation periods experienced by stakeholders may also vary depending on the 
specific  area  in  which  they  are  active.  Information  received  from  the  Danish  Human  Rights  Institute,  Nyt 
Europa, Globalt Fokus and Dansk Ungdoms Faellesraad in the context of the country visit. 

18 

 
                                                           
announced that they will focus on ensuring the observance of the indicative consultation period 
of four weeks158.  

On  1  January  2023,  Denmark  had  three  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, the same number as the previous year159. At that 
time, Denmark’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that remained pending was 
at  60%  (the  same  as  the  previous  year)  and  the  average  time  that  the  judgments  had  been 
pending implementation was 1 year and 6 months (compared to 6 months in 2022)160. On 15 
June 2023, the number of leading judgments pending implementation remains three161. 

The  awareness  of  a  rule  of  law  culture  is  actively  being  promoted.  The  Danish  Court 
Administration operates a learning website with digital teaching courses162. The website features 
a mixture of interactive content aimed to be of relevance to young people's everyday life163. 
While it is primarily aimed at pupils, students, and teachers, it is available for all citizens to 
explore  and  learn  more  about  the  court  system164.  In  addition,  the  rule  of  law  is  regularly 
debated  at  the  annual  Democratic  Festival  of  Denmark,  a  platform  for  democratic  dialogue 
between civil society, politicians, business, media, universities, and citizens165. At that festival, 
the National Court Administration prepared a broad debate and interaction between members 
of the public, decision makers and judges, including a mock trial and debates on data ethics 
and the protection of the citizens’ data166. 

158  Danish Government (2022), Responsibility for Denmark, p. 48. 
159  The adoption of necessary execution  measures  for a  judgment by the European  Court of Human  Rights is 
supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It is the Committee’s practice to group 
cases against a State requiring similar execution measures, particularly general measures, and examine them 
jointly. The first case in the group is designated as the leading case as regards the supervision of the general 
measures and repetitive cases within the group can be closed when it is assessed that all possible individual 
measures needed to provide redress to the applicant have been taken. 

160  All figures are calculated by the European Implementation Network and are based on the number of cases that 
are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2023. See the Contribution from the European 
Implementation Network for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 3. 

161  Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC-EXEC). 
162  www.kenddinret.dk. 
163  Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 28. 
164  Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 28. 
165  The  Folkemødet  festival  features  more  than  2 000  political  events  by  650  different  organisations.  It  is 
considered an important democratic event in Denmark for informal meetings and dialogue between decision 
makers  and  citizens.  More  than  50 000  citizens,  parliamentarians,  NGOs,  business  representatives  and 
grassroot organisations met up and exchanged view on the Danish society during the four-day festival in June 
2022. At that  festival,  the  National Court  Administration prepared a broad debate  and interaction between 
members of the public, decision makers and judges, including a mock trial and debates on data ethics and the 
protection of the citizens’ data. Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 28-29. 

166  Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 28-29. 

19 

 
                                                           
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2023 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2023-rule-law-report-targeted-
found 
stakeholder-consultation_en.  

be 

at 

Advokatwatch  (2023)  Long-awaited  legal  aid  and  free  legal  aid  committee  is  idle:  "It's  a  scandal" 
(Længe  ventet  udvalg 
ligger  brak:  "Det  er  en  skandale"), 
https://advokatwatch.dk/Advokatnyt/Politik/article15354167.ece. 

for  retshjælp  og 

fri  proces 

Advokatwatch  (2023)  Minister  overhears  protests  and  puts  legal  aid  committee  on  hold  (Minister 
overhører 
dvale), 
og 
https://advokatwatch.dk/Advokatnyt/Politik/article15477206.ece.  

retshjælpsudvalg 

protester 

haltende 

lægger 

i 

Altinget (2023) Justitia: More video conferencing and fewer judges can reduce case processing time in 
courts  (Justitia:  Flere  videomøder  og  færre  domsmænd  kan  nedbringe  sagsbehandlingstiden  ved 
domstolene), 
https://www.altinget.dk/embedsvaerk/artikel/justitia-flere-videomoeder-og-faerre-
domsmaend-kan-nedbringe-sagsbehandlingstiden-ved-
domstolene?toke=8ad8cbd4ac4047fca591f6f8377bdfa6.  

Bar and Law Society (2023) Finance law paves the way to reduce court waiting times (Finanslov baner 
vej  for  at  nedbringe  ventetiderne  ved  domstolene),  https://www.advokatsamfundet.dk/nyheder-
medier/nyheder/2023/finanslov-baner-vej-for-at-nedbringe-ventetiderne-ved-domstolene/. 

Berlingske Tidende (2023), Commentary: You can't come before a judge. The calendar system can't set 
a date that far in the future (Du kan ikke komme for en dommer. Kalendersystemet kan ikke sætte en 
dato  så  langt  ud  i  fremtiden),  https://www.berlingske.dk/kronikker/du-kan-ikke-komme-for-en-
dommer-kalendersystemet-kan-ikke-saette-en-dato.   

Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2022), Media pluralism monitor 2022 – country report 
on Denmark. 

Copenhagen  district  court  (2023),  Case  processing  times  at  Copenhagen  City  Court  increase, 
https://www.domstol.dk/koebenhavn/aktuelt/2023/1/sagsbehandlingstiderne-ved-koebenhavns-byret-
stiger/  

Copenhagen Economics (2022), Judiciary at breaking point: What will it cost to reduce case processing 
times?, 
https://copenhageneconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Domstole-i-knae-oktober-
2022.pdf  

Council  of  Europe,  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists 
https://coe.int/en/web/media-freedom. 

Danish  Government 
https://www.stm.dk/media/11768/regeringsgrundlag-2022.pdf.   

(2022),  Responsibility 

for  Denmark 

(Ansvar 

for  Danmark) 

Danish Government (2023), Input from Denmark for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Danish Parliament (2021), Resolution on the convening of negotiations on the Danish Public Access 
Act https://www.ft.dk/samling/20201/beslutningsforslag/B169/som_vedtaget.htm. 

Danish Parliament (2023), Committee on Legal Affairs, Annexes 147, 185 and 212:  

https://www.ft.dk/samling/20222/almdel/REU/bilag/147/index.htm  

https://www.ft.dk/samling/20222/almdel/REU/bilag/185/index.htm  

https://www.ft.dk/samling/20222/almdel/REU/bilag/212/index.htm.  

Danish Union of Journalists (2022), Action Plan on the Safety of Journalists (Dansk handlingsplan for 
sikkerhed 
journalister)  https://journalistforbundet.dk/nyhed/ny-faelles-dansk-handlingsplan-
journalisters-sikkerhed. 

for 

20 

 
Danish Union of Journalists (2022), Cuts cost many DJ members their jobs (Nedskæringer koster mange 
DJ-medlemmer 
https://journalistforbundet.dk/nyhed/nedskaeringer-koster-mange-dj-
medlemmer-jobbet.  

jobbet) 

Danske Medier (2022), Media industry sets up working group on updating press ethics rules following 
the  media  agreement  (Mediebranche  nedsætter  arbejdsgruppe  om  opdatering  af  presseetiske  regler 
ovenpå  medieaftalen)  https://danskemedier.dk/forside/mediebranche-nedsaetter-arbejdsgruppe-om-
opdatering-af-presseetiske-regler-ovenpaa-medieaftalen/. 

Directive (EU) 2018/1808 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions 
laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of 
audiovisual  media  services  (Audiovisual  Media  Services  Directive)  in  view  of  changing  market 
realities. 

ENNHRI (2023), Contribution from the Danish Human Rights Institute via ENNHRI for the 2023 Rule 
of Law Report. 

European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Denmark. 

European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Denmark. 

European Commission (2022), 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Denmark. 

European Commission (2022), 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Federation of Journalists (2023), Input from the European Federation of Journalists for the 
2023 Rule of Law Report. 

European  Parliament  (2022),  Flash  Eurobarometer:  News  &  Media  Survey  2022,  EB-ID 
2832/FL011EP https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2832. 

GRECO (2022),  Third evaluation round, Addendum to the Second Compliance Report on Denmark 
1680a8353f (coe.int).  

GRECO (2021), Fifth evaluation round – Compliance report on Preventing corruption and promoting 
integrity in central governments (top executive functions) and law enforcement agencies. 

Justitia 
Certainty 
content/uploads/2023/01/Statusrapport_retssikkerhed-2022.pdf.  

Report: 

(2023), 

Status 

Legal 

2022, 

https://justitia-int.org/wp-

Justitia (2023) Timeline: Pre-legislative committee on legal aid and free trial has been postponed again 
(Tidslinje:  Lovforberedende  udvalg  om  retshjælp  og  fri  proces  er  udsat  igen),  https://justitia-
int.org/tidslinje-lovforberedende-udvalg-om-retshjaelp-og-fri-proces-er-udsat-igen/. 

Jyllands  Posten  (2022),  Commentary:  Waiting  times  at  courts  must  be  brought  down  significantly 
(Ventetider 
https://jyllands-
posten.dk/debat/breve/ECE14531228/ventetider-ved-domstolene-skal-bringes-markant-ned/.  

domstolene 

markant 

bringes 

ned), 

skal 

ved 

Ministry  of  Culture  (2022),  Media  Agreement  for  2022-2025  (Medieaftale  for  2022-2025:  Den 
demokratiske 
https://kum.dk/aktuelt/nyheder/medieaftale-styrker-den-
demokratiske-samtale. 

styrkes) 

samtale 

skal 

Ministry of Culture (2023), Media Agreement for 2023-2026 (Medieaftale for 2023-2026: Samling om 
indhold) 
frie 
https://kum.dk/fileadmin/_kum/1_Nyheder_og_presse/2023/Medieaftale_for_2023-
2026__Samling_om_frie_medier_og_staerkt_dansk_indhold_-_TG.pdf. 

medier 

stærkt 

dansk 

og 

21 

 
Ministry  of  Culture  (2022),  Minister  for  Culture  appoints  Media  Responsibility  Committee 
(Kulturminister 
https://kum.dk/aktuelt/nyheder/kulturminister-
nedsaetter-medieansvarsudvalg. 

nedsætter  Medieansvarsudvalg) 

Ministry of Culture (2022), Report - Summary of results from questionnaire survey on Bureaucratic 
Associations 
of 
Burdens 
https://kum.dk/fileadmin/_kum/1_Nyheder_og_presse/2022/KUM_Foreningsrapport_SEP_TG.pdf. 

Ministry of Justice (2022), Agreement on reviewing the political system and strengthening Parliament's 
scrutiny  of  the  government  (Aftale  om  eftersyn  af  det  politiske  system  og  styrkelse  af  Folketingets 
kontrol  med  regeringen),  https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/pressemeddelelse/aftale-om-eftersyn-af-
det-politiske-system-og-styrkelse-af-folketingets-kontrol-med-regeringen-2/. 

Ministry of Justice (2022), Mandate for the Committee on the organisation and framework for the work 
of  government  and  central  administration  (Kommissorium  for  udvalget  om  organiseringen  af  og 
rammerne 
(Demokratiudvalget)), 
cen- 
https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Kommissorium-for-
Demokratiudvalget.pdf.  

traladministrations  arbejde 

regeringens  og 

for 

Ministry of Justice (2022), New committee headed by Thomas Rørdam to support political negotiations 
on  courts  (Nyt  udvalg  med  Thomas  Rørdam  i  spidsen  skal  understøtte  politiske  forhandlinger  om 
domstolene),  https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/pressemeddelelse/nyt-udvalg-med-thomas-roerdam-i-
spidsen-skal-understoette-politiske-forhandlinger-om-domstolene/.  

Ministry of Justice (2023) Government: Extraordinary funding to combat the backlog of cases in the 
courts in the run-up to new multi-year agreement (Regeringen: Ekstraordinær bevilling skal bekæmpe 
flerårsaftale), 
sagsbunkerne 
https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/pressemeddelelse/regeringen-ekstraordinaer-bevilling-skal-
bekaempe-sagsbunkerne-ved-domstolene-frem-mod-ny-fleraarsaftale/. 

domstolene 

frem 

mod 

ved 

ny 

National  Court  Administration  (2023),  Long  processing  times  continued  in  2022  (Fortsat  lange 
https://www.domstol.dk/aktuelt/2023/3/fortsat-lange-
sagsbehandlingstider 
sagsbehandlingstider-i-2022/.  

2022), 

i 

National  Courts  Administration  (2023),  Revised  plan  for  digitisation  of  criminal  and  probate  areas 
skifteområderne), 
digitalisering 
(Revideret 
https://www.domstol.dk/aktuelt/2023/1/revideret-plan-for-digitalisering-af-straffe-og-
skifteomraaderne/. 

straffe- 

plan 

for 

og 

af 

Office  for  Democratic  Institutions  and  Human  Rights  (2022),  ODIHR  Election  Expert  Team  Final 
Report 541356.pdf (osce.org).  

OECD (2023), Public Integrity Indicators Denmark (oecd-public-integrity-indicators.org).  

OECD (2023), Working Group on Bribery, Phase 4 evaluation of Denmark denmark-phase-4-report.pdf 
(oecd.org). 

Parliamentary 
https://www.ombudsmanden.dk/find/nyheder/alle/beretning_2022/.  

Ombudsman 

(2023), 

Annual 

report 

2022, 

Prime Minister’s Office (2022), Press meeting on Friday, 1 July 2022 (Pressemøde fredag den 1. juli 
2022), https://www.stm.dk/presse/pressemoedearkiv/pressemoede-fredag-den-1-juli-2022/. 

Pressenaevnet, the Press Ethical Rules: https://www.pressenaevnet.dk/press-ethical-rules/. 

Reporters without Borders – Denmark https://rsf.org/en/denmark. 

SN (2022), Openness is your only option to keep those in power at bay (Åbenhed er din eneste mulighed 
for at holde magthaverne i ørerne) https://www.sn.dk/sjaelland/aabenhed-er-din-eneste-mulighed-for-
at-holde-magthaverne-i-oererne/. 

22 

 
(2022), 
Transparency 
https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/2022_Report-Full_Exporting-Corruption_EN.pdf. 

International 

Corruption 

Exporting 

2022, 

Transparency International Denmark’s (2022), Announced reform of political party financing, Brev-til-
Transparency-International-om-partistoette.pdf.  

Transparency International (2023), Corruption Perceptions Index 2022. 

Various Danish umbrella associations (2021), Proposals to facilitate burdens on associations (Forslag 
til 
foreninger), 
lette 
https://finansdanmark.dk/media/t3jhullt/idekatalogforeninger_2021.pdf. 

byrder 

for 

at 

23 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Denmark 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in February 2023 with: 

  Danish Bar and Law Society  
  Danish Media Association 
  Danish Union of Journalists 
  Danish Press Council 
  Danish Institute for Human Rights 
  Dansk Ungdoms Faellesraad 
  Employee and Competence Agency  
  Globalt Fokus 
  Judges Association 
  Justitia 
  Ministry of Business 
  Ministry of Culture 
  Ministry of Justice 
  National Audit Office 
  National Court Administration 
  Nyt Europa  
  Parliamentary Ombudsman 
  Prosecution  Service,  including  the  National  Special  Crime  Unit  and  the  State 

Prosecutor for Special Crime Unit  

  Standing Orders Committee of the Parliament 
  Supreme Court 
  Transparency International Denmark  

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

  ALDA (European Association for Local Democracy) 
  Amnesty International  
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe  
  Civil Society Europe 
  Culture Action Europe  
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom  
  European Civic Forum  
  European Federation of Journalists  
  European Partnership for Democracy  
  European Youth Forum  
  Free Press Unlimited 
  Front Line Defenders 
 
 
 
 

ILGA Europe  
International Commission of Jurists 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)  
International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network 

24 

 
 
International Press Institute  

 
  JEF Europe  
  Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa 
  Philea  
  Reporters Without Borders  
  SOLIDAR 
  Transparency International EU 

25