Two Danish opposition parties are calling for 487 people to be granted Danish citizenship before a proposed screening system for anti-democratic views is introduced. The applicants had received letters saying they could expect to be included in a naturalisation bill in October, but their cases have been put on hold.
The Alternative (Alternativet) and the Red-Green Alliance (Enhedslisten) argue that people who have met the existing requirements should not have to wait for rules that have yet to be agreed. Their demand, reported by DR on 28 October, concerns applicants excluded from a government compromise covering a separate group of 2,055 people.
Two groups of applicants face different treatment
The 487 applicants had been told through Denmark’s digital mailbox service, e-Boks, that the Ministry of Immigration and Integration (Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet) expected to include them in an October bill. According to DR, those letters followed the processing of their applications under the existing requirements.
The government has agreed to move forward with a different group: the 2,055 people covered by an earlier naturalisation bill, L 98, which lapsed when an election was called.
That decision does not mean those applicants have already acquired citizenship. In its announcement on 5 October, the ministry said it would conduct a renewed, full review of whether they met the requirements before reintroducing the bill. It expected to submit it in the first half of 2027.
The October group remains outside that arrangement. The disagreement is therefore about which pending applications can proceed while politicians work on a new citizenship agreement.
Danish citizenship requires a parliamentary vote
For applicants using the naturalisation route, meeting the administrative requirements is one stage in a process that also requires legislation. The ministry’s official guidance explains that qualifying applicants must be included in a naturalisation bill approved by the Danish Parliament (Folketinget).
A letter indicating expected inclusion therefore does not itself confer citizenship. Nevertheless, the opposition parties argue that such letters create a reasonable expectation that applications will proceed under the rules applicants have already met.
The dispute over changing rules for pending applicants
Elise Sydendal, the Alternative’s citizenship spokesperson, told DR that the applicants had waited for years and done everything the authorities had asked of them. Peder Hvelplund, the Red-Green Alliance’s spokesperson, argued that changing the conditions after applicants had complied with them conflicted with rule-of-law principles.
The question was also raised in a parliamentary hearing on 28 October with Immigration and Integration Minister Morten Bødskov. The Naturalisation Committee (Indfødsretsudvalget) asked why the 487 applicants faced an indefinite delay and questioned the possible retrospective effect of stricter rules.
DR also cited Eva Ersbøll, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for Human Rights (Institut for Menneskerettigheder), who has questioned whether suspending applications pending new rules complies with Denmark’s obligations under the European Convention on Nationality.
The Social Liberal Party (Radikale Venstre) and the Moderates (Moderaterne), meanwhile, told DR that a broad parliamentary agreement was needed. The Moderates said they would have preferred the October applicants to be allowed to proceed, but described their exclusion as part of the compromise.
Screening recommendations are expected in March 2027
The government wants future applicants screened for anti-democratic statements and views that conflict with fundamental freedoms and human rights. An expert group is examining whether such a system is legally, technically and practically possible.
On 23 October, the ministry announced that the group’s work had been delayed. Its chair, Henrik Thomassen, now expects it to finish in mid-March 2027, rather than around the turn of the year.
That is a deadline for recommendations, not an implementation date for a screening system. A new political agreement and the rules governing it would still have to follow. For the 487 applicants, the immediate unresolved question is whether their cases can proceed before that process is complete.
