Thursday the Danish parliament has approved a very controversial immigration law proposal, wanted by the government with the aim of completely blocking the arrival of new migrants in the country. The new law, passed with 70 votes in favor and 24 against, foresees that applications for asylum or other forms of international protection are examined in centers located outside the Danish territory, in a “third country” that has not yet been publicly identified, which will also be responsible for receiving asylum seekers once their application has been accepted, and to deport migrants who have received a refusal.
In other words, migrants who apply for asylum in Denmark will still not be able to enter Danish territory even after having obtained refugee status: they will have to remain in the “third country”. Denmark thus became the first European country to provide for the examination of asylum applications outside of Europe and to completely block the arrival of migrants on its territory.
The bill had been presented by the Social Democratic government of Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen (center-left), but was also supported by the center-right opposition, despite the many criticisms received from various international organizations dealing with migration and from the High Commissioner United Nations for Refugees. However, it is not the first tough anti-immigration measure introduced in recent years by the center-left government: Denmark it had been for example the first European country to declare the area around Damascus, the capital of Syria, “safe”, with the aim of facilitating the return of many Syrian refugees to their country.
– Read also: Denmark wants to change the demographics of the suburbs
The Danish government has not yet said which will be the “third country” that will take over the asylum requests and the subsequent reception of refugees instead of Denmark, although in recent days Rwanda has been mentioned several times, which has a long tradition of welcoming migrants. However, the news has not yet been confirmed by the two governments and there are no certainties about it.
–
