Social Democratic attack dog gets government talking about ECHR

Danish politicians have this week been discussing the European Convention on Human Rights after an outspoken member of the Social Democratic party became the first member of parliament outside of the far right to suggest Denmark should ignore the ECHR.

Rasmus Stoklund, the Social Democratic political spokesperson and former immigration policy spokesperson, criticised Denmark’s participation in the human rights convention in a book, which he recently published.

In the book, he calls for Denmark to ignore rulings from the European Court of Human Rights, which interprets the convention, as it sees fit.

That’s because he wants the country to be able to deport criminals at risk of torture if they are returned to their home countries, a practice which would be in breach of the ECHR.

The human rights convention was “not made to protect violent criminals”, he said in an interview with newspaper Politiken this week.

He also criticised the European Court of Human Rights for becoming “more activist” over time and for getting in the way of Denmark’s ability to pursue strict immigration policies.

Stoklund is known for espousing views, particularly on immigration, that come straight from the far right. Though he has never been a minister, he cultivated a reputation as a hardliner on the issue during his time as immigration spokesperson, when he once said Denmark should not protect Syrian refugees purely because “a bomb might fall on your house”.

It’s unlikely he’s making the comments without some form of approval from his party, which tends to run a tight ship on ensuring its politicians keep to its overarching strategy.

But it’s unlikely that opposition to the ECHR will become a mainstream Social Democratic policy in the short term – at least, not while the party is part of the coalition government.

Moderate party leader Lars Løkke Rasmussen, who is foreign minister, flatly refused to entertain the idea when asked to comment on Stoklund’s views.

“We are not going to be in any situation where Denmark doesn’t respect court rulings,” he told broadcaster DR.

“I’m not saying that as the leader of the Moderates, I’m saying that as Denmark’s foreign minister,” he added.

Parents amass to oppose social media in schools

The widespread use of social media and smartphones at Danish schools is meeting with growing resistance from parents, in a topic focused on by DR this week.

The use of smartphones to communicate inside and outside of school is impacting lessons and should be curbed, according to a parents’ group who spoke to the broadcaster.

The group, Smartphonefri Barndom or ‘Smartphone-free childhood’, pledges not to give children devices before they reach the eighth grade. The concept is inspired by US movements like MAMA – Mothers Against Media Addiction and Wait Until 8th.

The parents use the group to support each other when their phone-free children begin to feel the effects of peer pressure, DR writes.

An expert in tech trends at Copenhagen Business School, professor Mikkel Flyverbom, said that parents are finding “the courage to follow their own common sense, an intuition that children’s daily lives are not necessarily improved by using the phone six to eight hours a day.”

The issue could require a “collective solution”, he added to DR.

Should 17-year-olds be allowed to drive?

In one of this week’s more surprising announcements, the government has proposed a change to traffic laws permitting 17-year-olds to drive alone during the day.

The proposal comes as part of a broader government plan to increase mobility in rural areas, where young people often have to travel long distances with poor public transport coverage to attend education. 

It limits the time during which the young drivers can get behind the wheel on their own to between 5am and 8pm, while a blood alcohol limit of zero will also apply.

It represents a significant change to driving rules in Denmark, where the minimum age for solo driving is 18.

The Danish Road Safety Council (Rådet For Sikker Trafik) immediately came out against the plan on Thursday, saying it would cause a higher number of deaths and injuries in traffic accidents.

“We are concerned about this proposal because calculations already show that it would result in more dead and seriously injured 17-year-olds every year,” the council’s deputy director Karina Petersen said.

The minister for town and rural districts, Morten Dahlin, argued that existing calculations on the area were not applicable because they don’t take into account the planned additional alcohol restriction.

He also cited driving laws in the UK, which unlike most European countries has long permitted 17-year-olds to drive.

Safety records on British and Danish roads are “nearly identical” despite this difference, Dahlin said.