Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

reads.

Vermunds defense: Low law on

Pernille Vermund have the confidence to Inger Støjberg, regardless of whether the reduced Instrukskommission and a potential impeachment should come forward to that she in her work as Foreigners - and Integration minister should have given an illegal instruction.

It says the president of the New Civic for the Extra Magazine in a telephone interview.

the FACTS: Støjbergs illegal instruction to be examined

in the Middle of may began Instrukskommission work to examine Inger Støjbergs (V) illegal separation of asylpar, where one was a minor.

the Instruction was unlawful because the pairs had requirements on individual assessment. There could be few which may not be separated, for example if they had children.

Instrukskommissionen get one and a half years to investigate the case, which started in 2016. Read more here:

* Berlingske brings in January 2016, a news of minor asylum seekers, who are married and live with an adult. Inger Støjberg announces as foreigners, integration, immediately, that she would prevent cases of 'barnebrude', when they come to Denmark.

* In a press release issued 10. February 2016 from Aliens affairs and Integration was the foreign office message to asylpar should be separated, if one party was under the age of 18 years.

* the Instruction has since been labeled as illegal by the Parliamentary Ombudsman. A separation would require an individual assessment of the couple concerned.

* the Ombudsman could not get on without the actual interrogations, which is what the commission is in the process of. It has secured a deal of material that have not yet been promoting in public.

* Several media outlets have written that the then immigration and integration minister, Inger Støjberg, was warned that it could be illegal to separate the pairs. She has rejected.

* Inger Støjberg has explained, that on the same day that the instruction was sent, was the foreign office orally informed that there would be reservations in relation to the instruction. It has internal mails since cast into doubt.

* A syrian asylpar was by the Copenhagen city Court in march awarded the 20,000 kroner in compensation, because they were tvangsadskilt in 2016. At that time the woman was 17 years and heavily pregnant. The man was 26 years old.

Sources: Politiken, Information, Berlingske, Ritzau.

Show more Close

- Pernille Vermund, if it is estimated that, Inger Støjberg has done has been illegal, how can you so?

- so far it is a commission that is to examine it, and the commission is the political set up. So if the commission were to come forward to, that it considers that there has been anything illegal, so I think, it testifies that there is a extremely need to have them changed by legislation. We cannot have a society where we do not have the legal right to separate the young girls from the grow men.

- So what I hear you saying, is that if the commission comes up with, that it has happened is illegal, then the hills In the still up on Inger?

- Yes, it's the law, there is something wrong with. So you have to make sure to get majority in the Parliament to get the law changed, so we do not end up in the same situation again.

- When you say it, it is so, because you believe that one must be able to separate the couples individual cases?

- If the Ingers the handling of the case is in conflict with Danish law, then it is the law that must be changed.

- It is the values behind the action, that are important to you, but is there a limit to much you can go for the values. For example, an offense in this scenario?

- I assume that Inger haven't done anything illegal.

But I must ask you to take starting point in the scenario where you find that she has done something illegal?

- Why should I? It is similar to the that others have done something illegal. I assume that Inger has complied with the law. I am also not around and reckon that neither you nor others are criminals and have done something illegal, which you must not.

- But it is also not all the others who are in a situation where a commission is investigating whether it has been given an illegal instruction.

- Try to hear, we don't have the people's court in Denmark, it is one of the nearest, I have experienced a kangaroo court. In what other situation would you not accept such a klapjagt of a man, like not even sitting in a trial.

- Okay, but if it was another situation where it was not about the asylpar, you would then deal with it in the same way?

- I am basically to Inger. It makes the the the political.

- May I just ask you a tricky question?

- Yes, of course.

- now, If it is illegal, and Inger will have to leave the Left, is she welcome in the New Civil?

- For me Inger is a very large part of the Left. But should it completely utopian to happen, that she will have to do it, she would be welcome. It is probably not in the cards, but I think it would be a shame if Denmark's largest party (the editors estimate that Vermund believe the Left, red.) completely lost the last remnant of the battle for Danish values.

Pernille Vermund and New Civil has started a fundraiser, where the citizens of MobilePay can send the 40 dollars for a fundraising campaign for the Left.

the FACTS: Mails claims Støjberg was warned about the illegality

Instrukskommissionen has Thursday started its work of examining the then immigration and integration minister Inger Støjberg (V) that in 2016, gave an illegal instruction on the separation of the asylpar, if one was a minor.

A number of emails have come forward, stating that the civil service should have warned Støjberg, that her instructions would be unlawful.

the Script has been called illegal by the Ombudsman, because it is not contained exceptions.

the Following mails underpins, among others, the then deputy permanent secretary in the ministry Lykke Sørensen, apparently, has warned Inger Støjberg directly.

the Warning went on to Støjbergs instruction was in conflict with the law, if the minister does not preserve the possibility for exceptions in its desire to separate asylpar. They had requirements on individual treatment, as, for example, could hit couples with children.

Here are some of the emails, which the commission on Thursday has published:

Sender: the foreign office (the person is not known).

Receiver: the foreign office (the mail is therefore internal).

Shipped: 10. February 2016.

- There is a very high risk of breach of the uncrc, for example, if we prevent a 15-year-old living together with a 24-year-old spouse, with whom she has a child.

- The enlightened Happiness of koncerndirektionsmødet on the basis of the assessment from the ministry of Justice, and Støjberg should have exclaimed, loudly: The risk I take gladly!

Sender: Henrik Grunnet, director of the immigration office.

Receives: Several people in the agency.

Shipped: 10. February 2016.

- Yes. The meeting I was in the ministry left no doubt about her attitude to the case – regardless of the Uncrc, when a couple has a common child.

Sender: Lykke Sørensen, deputy permanent secretary in the ministry.

Recipient: Laura Milo, the chief consultant of the ministry.

Dispatched: 19. February 2016.

- we can not, because it is the minister's clear indication that there must be exceptions. Jesper (Gori, head of department in the ministry, ed.) and I have had a long history with the minister on the matter.

Sender: Tanja Franck, director of the immigration office.

Recipient: Christian Kettel Thomsen, permanent secretary in the prime minister's office.

Dispatched: 3. march 2016.

- Attached the new draft from the UIBM (ministry, ed.). Thinking that the content is fine. But we should probably post something, since you can not quite hear it come out of the prime minister's mouth.

- But enough important that he get to know that the UIBM'n (probably the minister, ed.) have reported tougher out than the law can keep to.

Source: Instrukskommissionen.

Show more Close

Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.