Inger Støjberg (V) are again contradicted by a public official in the case of the separation of asylpar, where one is a minor.
The then integration minister approved the 9. February 2016 a note which she subsequently has called the 'absolutely central'.
But then-head of division Jesper Gori has Wednesday opposite Instrukskommissionen, which has been set up to look into the matter, a somewhat different interpretation.
- in my view, the note is dead and gone, he says, and consequently refers to, that he doesn't perceive it as that, the minister formally approved it.
Støjbergs explanation is that she, with the approval of the memorandum agreed that there should be exceptions in the separation of the asylpar, where one was a minor. It would be legal.
She has not referred to the memorandum previously either in the press or in consultation, before she mentioned it during a hearing. The civil service has conferred on the note a somewhat different value than the minister. They understood it such, that the minister would have a undtagelsesfri scheme. Which is illegal.
When cases have been created in the internal journaliseringssystem, it must at some point be closed, and it is made by one of the ministersekretærerne approves the case. But Jesper Gori understand the approval as a pure technical closing of the case and not as an endorsement.
Under all circumstances, he was not aware that the memorandum was approved until the year after in 2017.
- I perceive it as, to ministersekretæren closes the memo and send it back and see it not as something that has a value longer. I can't remember when I become aware of, that she has done, I think, first, it is in 2017, he says.
He explains that it is unusual that in the system is that the 'ministersekretæren approves on behalf of the ministersekretæren', and that it is not the minister, who stands as the approver.
the Then head of department and topjurist in the ministry Lykke Sørensen has previously explained that the memo nor played a special role for her.
Thus they understood it not as an order, which need to be implemented. Usually it is the office, where the case has root, which should be responsible for the implementation, explains Jesper Gori. However, two separate offices worked on the case.
Inger Støjberg have otherwise said, that the note was her 'grundpræmis' for the whole of the case, where a press release was to an illegal instruction, to asylpar should be separated. It was because there was not issued a proper instruction.
the Parliamentary ombudsman has called it illegal, that the press release was undtagelsesfri.
Inger Støjberg has previously said that she was not warned that a regime without exceptions could be illegal. It has several officials, otherwise the witness that she was, which is backed up by internal emails from that time.
She has said that she has removed the reservations from the press release, which came to function as an instruction. Permanent secretary Uffe Toudal Pedersen agreed to broadcast it. The reservations were that each couple had the right to an individual assessment.
Jesper Gori elaborates further that it was the scheme and not the press release, which was discussed at a meeting 9. February.
He remembers that he warned the minister that it could be illegal and end up in a case, if you separate all asylpar without reservations.
- She says that it may well be that there may be cases, but I am willing to take a procesrisiko, says Gori.