< Back to Compendium

1. Source of the legal provision

Denmark has no specific Holocaust denial ban; however, the Danish government has argued that the hate speech provision in Section 266(b) of the Criminal Code [Straffeloven] as amended by Consolidation Act no. 1851 of 20 September 2021 [lovbekendtgørelse nr. 1650 af 20. september 2021] could be applied to the denial of mass crimes. Accessible in the original language via: Retsinformation; <https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2021/1851>

2. Legal provision in English

Anyone who publicly or with intent to disseminate in a wider circle makes a statement or other communication by which a group of persons is threatened, insulted or degraded because of their race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, faith or sexual orientation is punishable by a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. (Subsection 2) When sentencing, it shall be considered a particularly aggravating circumstance that the offence has the character of propaganda activity.

3. Legal Provision in the original language

Den, der offentligt eller med forsæt til udbredelse i en videre kreds fremsætter udtalelse eller anden meddelelse, ved hvilken en gruppe af personer trues, forhånes eller nedværdiges på grund af sin race, hudfarve, nationale eller etniske oprindelse, tro eller seksuelle orientering, straffes med bøde eller fængsel indtil 2 år. (Stk. 2) Ved straffens udmåling skal det betragtes som en særligt skærpende omstændighed, at forholdet har karakter af propagandavirksomhed.

4. Key Points

  • Despite pressure from the EU, Denmark has not explicitly banned Holocaust denial, nor is there specific legislation concerning the denial or distortion of mass crimes in general.
  • While the government points to the applicability of hate speech legislation, there appear to have been no convictions for Holocaust denial so far.
  • The general hate speech law, Section 266(b) of the Criminal Code, falls short of the requirements of the EU Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA (hereafter ‘EU FD 2008’).
  • Danish resistance towards the criminalisation of Holocaust denial is often portrayed in the context of a specific “Nordic” tradition that puts great emphasis on the exercise of free speech.

5. Background

Denmark neither has a law which specifically criminalises the denial of the Holocaust, nor is there any provision which outlaws the approval, trivialisation and denial of unspecified genocides or crimes against humanity in general. The Danish government opposed plans to harmonise legislation on hate speech bans as part of the EU FD 2008 alongside Sweden and the United Kingdom.[1] It was joined in its rejection by academics nationwide.[2] The EU FD 2008, which was adopted on 28 November 2008, has prompted no legislative action in Denmark. The Danish Ministry of Justice has regarded existing legislation, in particular the hate speech offence in Section 266(b) of the Criminal Code, as sufficient to meet the obligation of the EU FD 2008 to criminalise the denial of certain mass crimes when it carries the danger of inciting violence or hatred against groups defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent, or national or ethnic origin.[3] However, the European Commission, in its 2014 report on the implementation of the EU FD 2008, pointed out that the EU FD 2008 defines victims of incitement as a group of persons or a member of such group, whereas the Danish law “only make[s] express reference to a group of people”.[4] Nevertheless, the European Commission has not opened an infringement procedure for inadequate transposition of the EU FD 2008 so far. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), the human rights monitoring body of the Council of Europe, has been more outspoken in its criticism of Danish legislative inaction. As early as 2005, the ECRI expressed its “[deep] regrets [on] the fact that Holocaust denial and revisionism are not a crime in Denmark.”[5] In its 2012 and 2017 reports on Denmark, the ECRI reiterated its “recommendation that the public denial, trivialisation or condoning of the Holocaust as well as the production, publication and dissemination of Nazi memorabilia and Holocaust denial and revisionism material be forbidden”.[6] Instead, the Danish government has pointed to its efforts to “maintain and promote knowledge about the Holocaust”,[7] and recently launched an action plan to combat antisemitism, which foresees that teaching about the Holocaust in primary and lower secondary schools and upper secondary education be mandatory.[8] Meanwhile, a report by the state-run Ytringsfrihedskommissionen [Freedom of Expression Commission] emphasised  “a long-standing social tradition of not criminalising denial of the Holocaust or other historical events”.[9] Scholars have argued that the resistance to adopt a Holocaust Denial law reflects a specific approach towards freedom of expression in Denmark which is influenced by the dominant doctrine of absolute protection of free speech in US constitutionalism.[10] Even more relevant may be the particular collective memory of the Holocaust in Denmark, where an ad-hoc rescue mission by citizens and government workers enabled the evacuation of the majority of Danish Jews to Sweden in 1943 and contributed to one of the highest Jewish survival rates of all German-occupied countries.[11] Therefore, the lack of memory laws in Nordic countries has been explained by scholars with the fact that Denmark did not experience such a difficult identity crisis and trauma as Germany and France where Holocaust denial triggers that trauma.[12]

6. Application

Despite the government’s insistence that the EU FD 2008 obligations are covered by Section 266(b) Criminal Code,[13] it appears that there have been no convictions on the sole basis of a contestation of the Holocaust under this provision so far.[14] However, the extradition of a Dane and a German to Germany, on charges of publishing and distributing CDs with strongly racist messages and Holocaust denial, in February 2009 have been interpreted as signs of stronger European cooperation on this matter.[15] In 2024, a man was sentenced to seven days of suspended imprisonment on the basis of Section 266(b) of the Criminal Code for running two websites that contained racist and antisemitic “jokes”.[16] At least one statement could be qualified as an approval of the Holocaust.[17] The court, however, did not distinguish between the nature of the different expressions, as it only had to determine that they threatened, insulted or degraded groups of people because of race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin or faith.

7. Controversies

The above-mentioned conviction contrasts with a seeming consensus in Danish society on the unrivalled importance of the freedom of speech. Historians and members of the Danish Jewish community have been opposed to an explicit ban on Holocaust denial, and have instead prioritised education as a means against negationism.[18] Predictably, the conviction in 2024 sparked criticism, with one law professor doubting whether Section 266(b) of the Criminal Code allows “courts to take into account the irony that often permeates Danish satire”.[19] The prosecutor who had led the indictment confirmed that the prosecution had been aiming to test the limits of the application of the law in order to set a precedent.[20]

8. Further Reading

[1] B. Pedersen, ‘Skal stater lovgive om historieskrivning?’, Kristeligt Dagblad (5 January 2012) <https://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/kirke-tro/skal-stater-lovgive-om-historieskrivning>. [2] ‘DIIS-forsker anbefaler nej til EU-forbud mod Holocaust-benægtelse’ (Dansk Institut for Internationale Studier, 9 February 2007) <https://www.diis.dk/aktivitet/diis-forsker-anbefaler-nej-til-eu-forbud-mod-holocaust-benaegtelse>; V. Greve, ‘Krænkende ytringer og strafferetten’ [2007] Volume 94, No. 3, Nordisk Tidsskrift for Kriminalvidenskab, p. 250. [3] Pedersen, 2012, see above note 1. [4] Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Council EU FD 2008, COM/2014/027 (EUR-lex, 27 January 2014), para. 3.1.1 <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0027>. [5] Third Report on Denmark (ECRI, adopted on 16 December 2005), p. 22 <https://rm.coe.int/third-report-on-denmark/16808b569e>. [6] Fourth report on Denmark, (ECRI, adopted on 23 March 2012), p. 31 <https://rm.coe.int/fourth-report-on-denmark/16808b56a1>; Fifth report on Denmark, (ECRI, adopted on 23 March 2017, p. 12, note 7 <https://rm.coe.int/fifth-report-on-denmark/16808b56a4>, in its report in 2017 the ECRI broadened its recommendation to criminalise “public denial, trivialisation, justification or condoning, with a racist aim” of mass crimes in general, see p. 12. [7] Appendix of the Third Report on Denmark, (ECRI), comment section, p. 43 <https://rm.coe.int/government-comments-on-the-third-report-on-denmark/16808b56aa>. [8] Handlingsplan mod antisemitisme [action plan against antisemitism], (Justitsministeriet, January 2022) p. 14 <https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Antisemitisme-handlingsplan.pdf>. [9] Betænkning om ytringsfrihedens rammer og vilkår i Danmark (Ytringsfrihedskommissionen, 2020), p. 538 <https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/betaenkning_nr._1573_2020_del_2.pdf>. [10]  L. Pech, ‘The Law of Holocaust Denial in Europe’, in L. Hennebel, T. Hochmann (eds), Genocide Denials and the Law (2011), p. 189. [11] Entry on Denmark in the Holocaust Encyclopaedia on the website of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum <https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/denmark> accessed 16 May 2024. [12] K. Nuotio, ‘Holocaust Denial as Memory Criminal Law Seen Through the Nordic Lenses’, [2023] Volume 11, No. 1, Bergen journal of criminal law and criminal justice, p. 20 <https://helda.helsinki.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/bc586024-18b0-4caf-b0d8-fb462cde9cee/content>. [13] Pedersen, 2012, see above note 1. [14] See EU-lovgivning om Holocaust-benægtelse, (Folkedrab.dk, January 2010) <https://folkedrab.dk/temaer/holocaust-benaegtelse/ytringsfrihed/eu-lovgivning-om-holocaust-benaegtelse>; also since 2010 there have been no reports about any criminal conviction specifically for Holocaust denial. [15] J. Adam, ‘Volskverhetzung: Auslieferung aus Dänemark’, (Endstation rechts, 23. February 2009) <https://www.endstation-rechts.de/news/volksverhetzung-auslieferung-aus-danemark>; Folkedrab.dk, 2010, see above note 14. [16] Retten i Holstebro [Holstebro Court], Judgement, 3 April 2024 <https://domstol.dk/holstebro/aktuelt/2024/4/mand-doemt-for-overtraedelse-af-straffelovens-266-b-for-vittigheder-online/#266%20b>. [17] The indictment contains quotes of the 129 “jokes”, among them “What’s worse than the Holocaust? – Six million Jews”, see L. Kirkebæk-Johansson, E. Mortensen, ‘Professor efter racismedom: Ironien får svære kår’ DR (5 April 2024) <https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/professor-efter-racismedom-ironien-faar-svaere-kaar>. [18] N. Hein, ‘I Holland kan man nu straffes med fængsel for at benægte holocaust. Men sådan skal det ikke være i Danmark’, Kristeligt Dagblad (25 July 2023) <https://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/kirke-og-tro/danske-joeder-nej-til-straf-holocaustbenaegtelse-som-i-holland>. [19] L. Kirkebæk-Johansson, E. Mortensen, ‘Professor efter racismedom: Ironien får svære kår’ DR (5 April 2024) <https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/professor-efter-racismedom-ironien-faar-svaere-kaar>. [20] Ibid.
Scroll to Top