The Refugee Convention should be revoked immediately

By cand. jur. Knud Eriksen

The refugee lobby insists that "Denmark has to live up to its' international obligations"- especially the Refugee Convention of 1951. The spokesmen on aliens from the other parties uncritically mimic this "everybody knows truth" when they hypocritically throw mud at the suggestions of the Progress Party (now, June 2005, of minimal size, k.e) for tightening of the immigration-laws.However, no country is internationally under any obligation to enter into agreements which are destructive for it. The UN-convention's real scope is deeply misunderstood, as it only gives Denmark a right to give asylum in spite of possible opposition from the other nation (that of the refugee). But what is more, it is really outright invalid in Denmark, because it has been ratified under false pretences and without democratic control. Let me outline the background and significance for Denmark of the convention.In 1950 the general assembly of the UN decided to establish a "United Nations High Commission for Refugees" (UNHCR). The implementation of a new refugee convention replacing the refugee convention of 28. November 1933, which had only been approved by eight countries, was to be the first decisive task of the new High Commissariat. The purpose was to get an agreement concerning the rest of the refugees from WWII.

The Refugee Convention of 1951 was signed on 28th July 1951 by 12 countries , including Denmark, at the conclusion of a UN conference taking place in Geneva, 2nd to 25th July 1951. The convention was to be ratified (finally approved, endorsed) by the member countries. In Denmark this was the prerogative of the king (the government), possibly after first having been presented to the parliament according to paragraph 18 of the constitution then in force. To-day, with the revised constitution of 1953, it is correspondingly the queen (the government), parliament and paragraph 19 of this constitution.Denmark was first at ratifying. That was on the 4th December 1952. When Australia had ratified as the 6th state on the 22nd January 1954, the treaty could go into effect on April the 22nd 1954. It was the heir to the throne, heir presumptive, Knud, who signed the convention in the absence of the king, whilst H.C. Hansen signed as minister of foreign affairs.The convention was ratified with various reservations by the commiserating states. Each article is in reality a treaty in itself, and when a state has made reservations in relation to an article, this article is not valid in relation to the state in question. Denmark made reservations in relation to article 14 (Artistic rights and industrial property rights), article 17 (paid employment) and partly to article 24 (employment legislation and social security). Danish legislation, which among other things ensures peoples pension, invalid pension, and widows' pension for Danish citizens, could not easily be extended to include refugees, but had to be altered first. It was the same with the copyright law. The right to take paid employment in Denmark was a right, which was reserved for citizens from the Scandinavian countries reciprocally.Had Denmark not made these reservations, the consequence would have been that the Refugee Convention should have been presented to parliament without any doubt (paragraph 19 then in force). In taking these reservations, it was decided that it was not necessary to present the convention to parliament after having procured statements from the relevant ministries concerning the need for legislation in their areas. One interesting consequence of this is, that to-day, it would not be necessary to ask parliament before Denmark, i.e. Queen Margrethe (the government) alone, could give notice of the termination of the Refugee Convention, effective one year later. This is now stated in paragraph 19 of the constitution, part 1. The convention itself contains a paragraph concerning general notice (regardless of the question of invalidity due to fraud/false conditions).A confidential report (which I have obtained from the archives of The Foreign Ministry) from the Danish delegation at the conference in Geneva shows, that Denmark should have taken many more reservations, than it did, eventually. Since these reservations were not taken, more changes of legislation would have been necessary, and that would have required the participation of parliament according to the constitution.Apperently parliament was cheated. So was heir presumptive, Knud, and thus also the king. These circumstances must signify, that the convention has been signed under false pretences, possibly by use of fraud. In that case it is invalid.Denmark's reservations were later revoked just as quietly and unnoticed as the convention had been ratified, to begin with. Quite without the cooperation of the representative assemblyThe original convention included only refugees from before 1951. Now an additional protocol suddenly made sure that the convention included all refugees. And now, suddenly, all refugees had the same social rights as Danes.These things happened in 1968 with Poul Hartling (later high commissioner of refugees) as key person. An innocently looking government circular of 21st June 1968 from the social ministry secured for the refugees peoples-, invalid- and widows pension. It was based on article 24 of the convention, which had been lurked through. This case has a story of its own told in the "Danskeren" (The Dane) 2/94 see the article "The Refugee Convention under a Magnifying Glass" below.Later on more rights followed. Refugees obtained a right to vote and could be elected at the communal- and county elections, if they had lived in the country for only three years. This was based on article 7 of the convention, which Denmark had not wanted. The pro-refugee parties secured for themselves many immigrant votes along the way. (Actually the traditional balance between the socialist- and the right wing parties has been decisively shifted, which was presumably also the intention, red.)From then on the basis of the legislation concerning foreigners is hereby decisively shifted. More importantly, the refugee situation has changed dramatically from what it was in 1951, as the torrent of refugees has increased enormously, so that Denmark's role as role country means that we are now drowning in refugees.Denmark should now simply give notice of the termination of the treaty which can easily be done. It is a simple, obvious and justified act made necessary in order to look after Danish interests. That is the duty of our leaders the queen, ministers and politicians. The whole area of the problem of refugees and the legislation concerning foreigners should thereafter be revised with due consideration for the Danes. After all they have the first right to Denmark. And it cannot happen fast enough. Our thousand years old homeland is crumbling.

Those who have the power to stop the demolition of the country, but who do nothing, commit treason. It is worse that treason. It is an irrevocable crime against the Danish people and above all against the future generations of Danes.Knud Eriksen


Home now also see my websites

'The Controversy of Zion'
and

Mosaic Upps