Starting January 1st, 2024, refugees in Denmark will have their temporary residence permits revoked if they travel back to their home countries.
This comes after the Danish Parliament voted on December 7th, 2023 to amend the Aliens Act.
The New Rule
The amendment cancels the previous 10-year limit, meaning permits can be revoked regardless of how long a refugee has lived in Denmark.
As explained on the New to Denmark website, “When we assume, that you no longer risk persecution in your home country, your residence permit may be revoked.”
Previously, only those who traveled home within 10 years of receiving their first permit risked cancellation.
Now, according to the Danish Immigration Service, “if you are a refugee with temporary residence permit in Denmark and you at some point travel to your home country after the new rules comes into effect,” a permit may be revoked as the refugee may be considered no longer at risk.
Who is Affected?
The new rules only apply to travel beginning January 1st, 2024 onwards.
Refugees who went home before then will not be impacted.
Those with permanent residence permits are also unaffected, along with refugees traveling on other grounds besides asylum.
Additionally, no changes have been made to travel restrictions on convention and alien passports.
These will still prevent refugees from returning until they’ve lived in Denmark for 10 years.
How Can Refugees Lose Residence Permits?
Per the Immigration Service, there are several ways refugees may have temporary permits withdrawn.
Providing false information to gain a permit leads to automatic revocation when discovered.
Traveling frequently abroad or specifically to one’s home country is also grounds for cancellation.
If a refugee is considered a threat to Denmark’s “national security, public order, safety or health,” their permit can be revoked as well.
On December 15th, Norway also changed its rules to let Ukrainians under temporary protection lose residence rights for traveling home.
Previously, Ukrainians had been the only nationality exempt in Norway.
Denmark Defends Controversial Decision
The Danish government defends this policy change as necessary to discourage unfounded asylum claims.
As quoted in media reports, “People who can travel back and forth to the country they fled do not need protection.”
Critics counter that refugees may have valid reasons for visiting home, like family emergencies.
Automatically assuming they face no persecution risks returning people to danger.
Human rights groups plan to monitor the law’s implementation and effects.
They warned that loss of residence permits could separate families or force people back to still unsafe situations.
While security concerns make total freedom of movement difficult, advocates urge nuance in assessing individual cases before revoking status.
Tighter Rules Create Uncertainty for EU Travelers
The new Danish policy raises questions for European Union (EU) citizens visiting or immigrating long-term.
The ETIAS visa waiver program launching in May 2025 aims to enhance security while facilitating EU travel.
However, tighter residency requirements could create barriers.
For EU families relocating to work or study in Denmark, the law creates uncertainty.
If residency is revoked over visiting home, it disrupts essential services like schooling.
Investors may also hesitate to develop assets and businesses lacking residency guarantees.
Even EU tourists could feel effects if the law expands to restrict other visitor types.
While improving control, Denmark risks harming tourism and its reputation as a welcoming destination.
As EU countries balance refugee rights and security, Denmark’s policy signals a tougher stance.
For EU citizens accustomed to easy intra-Europe access, this hints at potential future restrictions.
Denmark’s Move Impacts EU Coordination on Immigration
Denmark’s unilateral decision counters recent EU efforts to align immigration and asylum policies.
The European Commission aims to create a common procedure by 2024.
However, Denmark’s new law deviates from the EU’s direction towards protection, not automatic revocation of status.
This complicates integrated border management and risks asylum seekers choosing alternate EU entry points.
Since Denmark opted out of EU justice and home affairs laws, it retains independence over national immigration rules.
Still, its refugee stance pressures the EU during already contentious policy negotiations.
With Schengen success requiring coordination, Denmark’s contrarian approach may inspire other states to bypass EU directives.
This fragmentation undermines ETIAS and risks unequal treatment based on entry country.
Balancing Refugee Rights and National Policies
Denmark’s policy shift reflects the challenging balancing act countries face between refugee rights and national agendas.
Governments must provide asylum to those fleeing conflict, yet also control borders and discourage exploitation of the system.
Finding an ethical middle ground is complex, especially with diverse circumstances among refugee populations.
As the new Danish law shows, governments continue debating where lines should be drawn on residency rules and requirements.
With rising global displacement, these debates will likely continue.
Nations must cooperate to uphold humanitarian obligations.
However, locally, they also answer to citizens questioning immigration’s impact.
Denmark offers protections many dream of.
However, for refugees, the chance to ever return home may now come at too high a cost.