Anonymous Snitching Snubs Hopes Of Citizenship

The two men and one woman, who had already fulfilled Denmark's exhaustive naturalization requirements, were subjected to this grilling following anonymous complaints about their Facebook activity. The complaints triggered a freeze on their applications, despite the applicants meeting a laundry list of requirements that includes everything from employment, a clean criminal record and having no outstanding public debts to passing a language exam and a trivia quiz, signing a declaration of loyalty and physically shaking the hand of the local mayor or similar official (skin contact explicitly required).

Their hopes of citizenship now rest on a vote by the naturalization committee, which has the power to reject or approve their applications. One applicant is reported to have used a picture of Saddam Hussein as his profile picture. Another posted a homophobic comment urging parliament to "do something about your homosexuality instead" in response to parliament passing an islamophobic "Burqa ban". While such expressions are ostensibly protected under Denmark’s constitution, they have now become grounds for informal inquisitions into applicants' "democratic mindset".

The interviews happened behind closed doors but some questions from anonymous committee members have been reported. Questions included:

• Should homosexuals be allowed to hold hands and kiss in public?
• What would you say if your child dated someone who wasn’t Muslim?
• Which value do you think is the most important in a democracy?

Peder Hvelplund, member of the committee for the pro-democracy "Red-Green" opposition party did not ask any questions. Instead he spent his talking time apologizing to applicants that they had to be "dragged through such an undignified process".

The committee's vice-chair, Helene Brydensholt from the green "Alternative" party had resigned in protest and was not present.

Being targeted as props for right-wing culture war theatrics is likely to have devastating consequences for the applicants' prospects of gaining citizenship and having their legal and political rights safeguarded. All three were visibly nervous and emotional before appearing before the committee. The woman applicant left the hearing in visible distress, rushing past reporters in tears.

Pro-democracy Opposition: "Uncomfortable, Awkward and Intimidating"

The racist majority of the committee had a positive assessment of the interrogations with chairman of the committee, Islamophobic firebrand Mikkel Bjørn from the fascist Danish People's Party called the interviews "a really good conversation and a really good dialogue". The pro-democratic opposition had a different view of the interviews with Hvelplund describing them as "the most uncomfortable, awkward and intimidating experience" in his time in politics.

The interrogations are a long-time wet dream of the racist right and are the pet project of Mikkel Bjørn whose racist views are well-documented. Bjørn has stated an explicit and borderline genocidal desire to reduce the Muslim population of Denmark, remove the legal status of all Muslim faith communities and "make islamic life in Denmark close to impossible".

The efforts of Bjørn and the "Danish People's Party" has been seconded by the ruling "Social Democrats" whose already reactionary politics has taken a significant authoritarian turn over recent years. Social Democrat committee member Anders Kronborg has described the intimidating interviews as "a grand gesture" towards applicants who are "invited to the stronghold of democracy" to tell "why they have these views and find them reconcilable with having a Danish passport".

Expect The Danish Inquisition: Libertarians Demands "Systematic Screenings" Of All Applicants

The interviews are not the only measure taken by Denmark's Islamophobic political elite to police the speech of the kingdom's Muslim minority. The far-right libertarian "Liberal Alliance" party has demanded that the regime forms an expert group to develop even more intrusive mechanisms to "systematically screen" the "democratic mindset" of all who apply for citizenship.

The interviews happens as the latest development in over three decades of rightward shift in Danish politics that has made islamophobic and racist opinions the new "political correctness" among the media and ruling elite. Especially the "Social Democrats", who once had roots in the labour movement, have moved so far right as to be virtually indistinguishable from the fascist Danish People's Party.

A Process Mired In Chaos

The interviews are happening in a legal grey zone under chaotic and arbitrary procedures. Leading up to today's interrogations legal scholars and civil servants had voiced concerns about the legality of the interrogations under national and international human rights law. This did not move the committee's majority who decided to push forward with the interviews.

In Denmark's peculiar naturalization process that dates back to the 1800's citizenship is granted through a legislative process rather than an administrative one. In practice this leaves applicants at the mercy of political whim, stripped of many of the legal protections against arbitrary, biased and lazy decisions that normally apply in administrative law. The sheer amount of applicants and paperwork means that the MP's on the committee often vote on applications they have never read and their decisions are reported to depend on the individual moods of MP's on the day of the vote rather than on serious casework.

Today was no different and up to the last moments the procedural rules of the interrogations were unclear. In the letter summoning them to appear before the committee applicants had been told to come alone. However, one applicant had asked in advance whether they could bring a council. After some debate and confusion the request was granted. When appearing the council asked whether they were allowed to record the proceedings. This caused some debate in the committee before proceedings could go ahead. It is unknown whether the council was allowed to record the interrogation or not.

The three applicants will know whether they've passed through the needle's eye on December 19th when the naturalization bill is introduced to parliament. The Danish People's Party has already announced that they will vote against the naturalization of two of the applicants.

Denying citizenship on arbitrary grounds contravenes international human rights law. However, courts lack the authority to grant citizenship to those unfairly denied, leaving compensation as the only recourse for victims of this deeply flawed process.

This impasse lasted for more than three hours, reflecting not only the tension between institutions but also the complexity of the current political context.

On Wednesday, the South Korean police were engaged in a prolonged confrontation with agents of the Presidential Security Service while attempting to carry out a raid on the president’s office. This action is part of a broader investigation into Yoon’s recent declaration of martial law, which was revoked by the National Assembly within hours of its implementation.

According to reports from the Yonhap news agency, police officers attempted to access the presidential office at 11:50 local time but encountered strong resistance from security personnel, who argued that access should be prevented for security reasons. This impasse lasted for more than three hours, reflecting not only the tension between institutions but also the complexity of the current political context.

The investigation against Yoon Suk-yeol includes serious allegations, including insurrection, which adds a critical dimension to the situation. The declaration of martial law, although brief, has generated intense debate about the use of executive power and civil liberties in the country. Early in the morning, police conducted raids on several agencies, including the National Police Agency and the Seoul Metropolitan Police.

This suggests that authorities are looking to establish a wider network of accountability and transparency around the president’s decisions. This episode highlights the inherent tensions in the South Korean political system, where institutions must balance national security with accountability.