news

The flag controversy first erupted in 2018, when Danish citizen Martin Hedegård raised the American flag in his garden in Nørre Bjert, near Kolding, during a family reunion. Hedegård’s actions drew swift backlash from local authorities, invoking an archaic 1915 regulation that forbids the display of foreign flags. He was reported to the police, sparking a legal battle that would eventually reach Denmark's Supreme Court.

Despite Hedegård’s acquittal in the Supreme Court, the regime has pushed forward with efforts to reinstate the ban by supporting a bill spearheaded by far-right extremist Søren Espersen, who is closely aligned with the ultra-nationalist "Denmark Democrates" party. Espersen, known for his chauvinist views and close ties to Zionism, was the original proposer of the flag ban.

'Serves no purpose' Observers have denounced the proposed flag ban as empty symbolism, aimed at stirring nationalist fervor rather than addressing substantive issues. Carsten Hove, the lawyer who defended Hedegård in the Supreme Court, has been vocal in his criticism of the regime’s latest move, questioning whether the bill would even hold up to judicial scrutiny. “I don’t see how this law serves any purpose. It violates Denmark's obligations regarding human rights and freedom of expression, so it cannot stand,” Hove said. “In my opinion, the Supreme Court would strike it down if a new case arose.”

Espersen, who will be present at the first reading of the bill, dismissed warings that his bill is a violation of human rights.

“We have to trust the government’s lawyers, and I can’t imagine our government proposing a law that isn’t legally sound,” Espersen said, defending the regime's decision to push ahead with the controversial proposal.

Espersen also rejected accusations that the bill is a purely nationalist gesture.

“There are plenty of symbols that actually mean something, and the Dannebrog [Danish flag] is one of them,” he said. “I’m happy that we’re now having the first reading of the bill. I don’t think there will be many opponents. It’s a statement of what Denmark means to all of us. We have a flag that everyone loves.”

Regime Support Secured

Denmarks Social Democratic-led right-wing regime supports for the bill. So does the far-right "Denmark Democrats", "Danish People's Party" and Conservative parties, thereby making the parliamentary process a mere formality.

Peter Hummelgaard, head of Denmark’s Social Democratic-controlled Ministry of Justice, has offered full-throated support for the proposed law, underscoring the regime’s commitment to promoting nationalist ideals. In a statement Hummelgaard framed the bill as necessary for preserving national identity.

“The Dannebrog is the most important national symbol we have in Denmark. A symbol that unites Danes as a people. The government believes that the Dannebrog should enjoy a very special status in Denmark,” Hummelgaard said. “I also believe that this special status should mean that there should once again be regulations on flagging, so that it isn’t allowed to freely fly other nations' flags. It has been this way for more than 100 years, and it should be this way again.”