Denmark's government will change election law to stop residents at the Kærshovedgård departure center from voting. Up to thirty-six foreigners living at the center in Central Jutland could currently have the right to vote in municipal and regional elections. Interior Minister Sophie Løhde confirmed this in a parliamentary response to the Danish People's Party's Nick Zimmermann.
This situation is unacceptable to the governing coalition. Minister Løhde stated the government believes foreigners asked to leave Denmark should not influence local affairs. Her ministry will now initiate legislation to exclude more groups of foreigners staying illegally from voting rights. The specific groups to be excluded are not yet defined.
The Source of the Controversy
The issue came to light after Nick Zimmermann questioned the minister about voting rights at Kærshovedgård. Her written answer revealed a breakdown of the 226 foreign residents living there as of January this year. Among them, 146 are individuals expelled by court order and 44 are on tolerated stay. Neither of these groups has voting rights under existing law.
The core problem lies with the remaining thirty-six residents. These are rejected asylum seekers not cooperating with departure, people staying illegally, or individuals present for 'other' reasons. Minister Løhde could not rule out that these thirty-six people have the right to vote. For example, a rejected asylum seeker might have previously had legal residence and a permanent address in Denmark for four years prior to an election.
A Political Reaction
Nick Zimmermann of the Danish People's Party called the potential voting rights 'completely grotesque.' He argued that people at Kærshovedgård, who are awaiting removal from the country, should under no circumstances be able to vote in Danish elections. Zimmermann pointed the finger at the government for lacking control over the situation at the center. He expressed astonishment that rejected asylum seekers, foreigners not wanted in Denmark, could potentially interfere in Danish elections.
His party submitted a resolution proposal at the end of 2025 to address this exact issue. The government's new initiative appears to be a direct response to this political pressure. The debate touches a deep nerve in Danish immigration policy, where the alignment of rights with legal status is perpetually scrutinized. It raises fundamental questions about the link between political participation and a person's legal standing within the Danish state.
Understanding the Legal Framework
The current voting law forms the basis for this complex scenario. Foreigners from outside the EU, Iceland, and Norway can obtain local voting rights after four years of continuous legal residence. The law explicitly denies this right to foreigners expelled by final court judgment or administrative decision. The legal gray area involves those in procedural limbo, like the thirty-six at Kærshovedgård, who may have accrued the four-year residence period before their status changed.
This is not merely about a small number of potential votes. It is a symbolic battle over the boundaries of Danish democracy and integration. The government's move to amend the law seeks to close what it sees as a loophole. It aims to ensure that individuals the state is actively trying to remove cannot shape local political decisions. This includes budgets for schools, elderly care, and infrastructure in Danish municipalities.
The Broader Context of Integration
This policy shift occurs within Denmark's strict immigration and integration framework. The Danish welfare system is closely tied to legal residency and contribution. Political participation is viewed by many as the final step in a full integration process, not a right for those deemed to be leaving. The government's stance reinforces a principle that local democratic influence is reserved for those with a recognized future in the country.
For the residents of Kærshovedgård, this proposed change further formalizes their exclusion from Danish society. While they physically reside within a Danish municipality, their political voice would be formally silenced. The center itself, intended as a temporary holding facility, becomes a zone of legal and civic ambiguity. The minister's initiative seeks to erase that ambiguity by making the law match the intended purpose of such centers.