By Michala Clante Bendixen, member of the Committee for Underground Refugees

Most Danes take their citizenship for granted. But if you or your parents weren’t born in Denmark, obtaining citizenship can be an impossible dream, even if you’ve spent your whole life here. Very few people realise just how strict the rules for naturalisation have become over the past few years. Without comparison, Denmark now has the toughest demands in Europe.

We have reached a point without much debate where a number of people will never become ‘true Danes’ with full rights, no matter how big an effort they make, or how long they have lived in the country. The required levels for language skills and economic status, plus knowledge of Danish culture and history, are so high that many ‘old’ Danes wouldn’t pass the test. Even members of the Danish parliament have failed the test when they tried it for fun.

A certain amount of language skills and knowledge of the country seems a reasonable prerequisite for a Danish passport. But it is hard to argue for demands that many will never be able to meet. Nine out of ten of the newly arrived refugees from Burma will never pass the language test according to a survey by the Danish Refugee Council. And these are refugees hand-picked for their integration potential.

So what are the demands exactly? As explained below they include having lived a certain number of years in Denmark, being able to support oneself, having a clean criminal record, passing a language exam as well as a multiple choice test on culture and history, and finally signing a statement.

Firstly, you must have been living, legally, in the country for the past nine years, without interruption. Then you must prove that you have been able to support yourself for four of the last five years, and have no debts to the state. You also have to give up your present citizenship as Denmark doesn’t accept dual citizenship.

A conviction for a minor crime can postpone it for several years, and the citizenship is completely out of the question if you have ever had a conviction for more than 60 days. And regarding the proportions I have found an example where the possession of 0.7g of hash will postpone your citizenship by 11 years, on top of the nine you already had to wait.

Last winter the new, and tougher, version of the naturalisation test (Indfødsretprøven) was introduced, and barely 25 percent passed it. In it you have 45 minutes to answer a minimum of 32 out of 40 multiple choice questions correctly. The questions can be about the European Parliament, the population groups in the Viking age, the year a certain Danish political party was established, the name of a Danish sculptor etc. Basically, these are questions that only one third of the ‘original’ Danish population can answer correctly, namely the ones with higher education degrees. Besides, the questions are completely irrelevant with regards to daily participation in Danish society.

Then there are the language skill requirements: only graduating from the highest level of Danish known as ‘Danskprøve 3’ gives access to citizenship. Individual teachers will determine which of the three levels you fit into, and you will only be placed on level 3 if you already have an education or about nine years of school attendance from your home country, and if you show promising abilities for future learning – the levels are parallel courses and you cannot rise from one to the next. The course has to be completed within three years.

Last but not least, you have to sign a statement saying that you will respect Danish law, not beat your wife and children and respect Danish democracy. Native Danes, like myself, have never agreed to this in writing – why is it assumed that new citizens may be more violent or hostile to society than existing ones?

Denmark now has the toughest citizenship demands in Europe. Most countries have no language test and have a much shorter time limit for application. In Sweden, for example, refugees can apply after only four years. Many countries encourage newcomers to become citizens because they see it as a way not just to improve integration but also to encourage an active and responsible participation in society. Most other countries also accept dual citizenship, for similar reasons.

The  demands are also contrary to international conventions, as two leading NGOs have pointed out to the government. We have agreed to ease the way to citizenship for refugees and stateless people. Yet we are doing the exact opposite. The fact is that the  demands are discriminatory, especially as refugees have a much poorer chance of learning Danish and getting a foothold on the labour market since many are traumatised and have neither an existing network to rely upon, nor appropriate job experience. Women are particularly subject to this discrimination because many arrive with less education and less work experience than men. Basically, an illiterate woman has no chance of ever obtaining citizenship.

The procedure in itself is also quite unique. Naturalisation is not a right, even if you fulfil all the demands. It is seen as a gift from the Parliament, as described in a dusty chapter of the Danish constitution. Unless the Police Intelligence Service are suspicious of you, your name will appear on a list which a parliamentary committee has to approve. According to esteemed lawyers, this procedure is against the Danish Law of Administration.

How can we demand that newcomers speak better Danish, be more industrious and better informed than the average citizen? My mother-in-law only went to school for six years and is dyslexic. An alcoholic on incapacity benefits is not self supportive. Yet they are all Danish citizens, with a passport and the right to vote.

The sad paradox is that it was Dansk Folkeparti who suggested all these new demands, yet surveys show that their voters would be the last ones to pass the test if they had to. Rather, the Danes with the highest level of education and income are the most positive about immigration.

Having the option to obtain citizenship in the country in which you live is important for the sense of belonging and taking an active part in society. It is about having influence and being protected by the country to which you belong. It is also about having a passport to enable you to travel freely. It’s about voting and applying for jobs.

Refugees have a special need to create bonds with their new country as they may never be able to return to their home countries, and most of them feel a deep and sincere gratitude for their asylum. So why not welcome them for real when we have already given them a residency permit?

The tough demands originate from the idea of assimilation rather than integration. I am convinced that each applicant wants to make an effort to prove their attachment to Denmark. However, when it becomes too difficult, the overall effect will be poorer integration and further division between the different ethnic groups.