Denmark’s Ex-Immigration Minister Gets Jail Sentence for Ordering Separation of Child Brides From Their ‘Husbands’
BBC: “The verdict cannot be appealed and the jail sentence is unconditional, meaning that it must be served.”
On Monday, Denmark’s high-power court convicted Inger Stoejberg, who served as the country’s immigration minister between 2015-19, for ordering the separation of refugees couples if the woman was under 18.
Stoejberg’s 2016 order, as she argues, was aimed at stamping out the practice of child brides who were being imported into the country in the wake of the migrant wave. “A total of 23 couples were separated, with the wives ranging in age from 15 to 17 years,” Germany’s DW News reported.
The so-called Impeachment Court, specially set up for Stoejberg’s trial, “agreed that the order had violated Danish law and the European Convention on Human Rights,” the TV network Euronews reported.
The court’s judgment cannot be challenged and the former minister is expected to serve the 60-day sentence. “The verdict cannot be appealed and the jail sentence is unconditional, meaning that it must be served,” the BBC reported.
Stoejberg, who belongs to the center-right Venstre Party, appeared defiant in face of the harsh judgment. “It’s not just me who has lost but Danish values have lost too,” she told journalists outside the courthouse.
Reuters news agency reported the bizarre conviction:
Former Danish immigration minister Inger Stojberg, known for her hardline stance in that role, was handed a 60-day prison sentence on Monday by an impeachment court for having illegally ordered the separation of under-age couples seeking asylum.
Stojberg was accused of knowingly breaking the law in 2016 by ordering the separation of all asylum-seeking refugee couples where at least one was under 18 years of age, a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Under Danish and human rights law, couples must be assessed individually, implying that the minister’s order to separate all underage couples was illegal. A total of 23 couples were separated.
“I’m very, very surprised. I think it is the Danish values that have lost,” Stojberg told reporters. “I wished and still wish to protect these girls.”
The opponents of Stoejberg’s tough immigration policy celebrated her sentencing on Twitter and other social media platforms. The Danish politician has long been in the crosshairs of European leftwing and pro-open border activists.
In a 2018 article, Germany’s state-funded DW News published a litany of charges against the then-Danish minister. “Stoejberg has overseen dozens of statutes tightening immigration laws under her tenure, such as requirements for learning Danish, tougher citizenship tests and financial independence. Stoejberg has limited the amount of social services available to asylum seekers,” the German broadcaster lamented.
Since the migrant wave of 2015, Europe has seen a spike in child marriages. While there are no reliable statistics, European NGOs estimate that there are thousands of child brides living in forced marriages across the continent.
While Stoejberg in Denmark raised the alarm about imported child brides, other European countries tried to appease the migrants on this issue. In 2016, Germany’s Justice Minister Heiko Maas proposed a law aimed at legalizing the primitive practice of child brides.
“A 13-year-old child bride would have to testify against her husband, saying that her well-being as a child is under threat. If neither the child nor the Child Welfare Service lodges a complaint, for all practical purposes the marriage would be declared legitimate,” German newspaper Bild reported citing the provisions of the bill.
In a turn of events that typify today’s Europe: while Stoejberg faces incarceration for her courageous stand, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel elevated her appeasing justice minister to the post of country’s foreign minister in 2018.
“U.S. looking into “child bride” cases among Afghan evacuees”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Coming to a country near us, sooner rather than later….
Without “America”, curtains of darkness will be drawn across the world.
The ending: genocide, on a level that would make Stalin, Mao and Hitler look like pikers.
Feminism Gutted by Wokeness.
I very much want to hear the progressive argument that an immigrant child bride is okay, but a 14 year old American girl can’t marry.
Or, perhaps they won’t make that argument. I’m not sure which is worse…
In just reading that, the policy ought to have not been set at 18. Possibly 16 or 17 with a vast age difference and absolutely for under 16.
There are US states where 14-year-olds can marry, with parental consent. And in most states 16-year-olds can do so.
Louisiana is now at 16, with parents’ permission and judicial consent, and can’t marry someone three years older than them. Lord knows what it was before.
As I recall, Loretta Lynn and Laura Ingalls both married at 13.
AMERICANS: The progressive left in the US has made a mockery of foundational principles of Western law and civil society.
DANES: Hold our beer.
guess you forgot when Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin
We haven’t forgotten it. We just don’t believe it set a standard for American law.
Actually it was the standard for American law until quite recently. A typical Leftist mistake is assuming that his standards always have been THE standard.
As SDN says, it didn’t set the standard, it was the standard. For almost all of our history such a marriage would have been unremarkable.
Well, yeah, but she was a second cousin and her Dad (first cousin) was the bass player in Jerry’s band.
Why is the bass player in bands always the source of mischief?
Personally, I believe every child bride should be separated from her husband upon entering any country under any circumstance to ask the child if she was coerced and/or needs rescue. Period.
That’s not what’s meant by “separation”. Nobody would have objected had the Danish minister ordered that. By all means interview all purported couples, of all ages, separately, to establish their bona fides. In the case of any couple coming from a country where women are forced into marriage, that should include asking the woman whether she consents to remain with her purported husband.
But that’s not what this minister did. Forcibly separating a genuinely married couple, and keeping them separate, without any basis in law, does not seem legitimate. Especially if you don’t do the same to couples from countries such as the USA, that also allow minors to marry.
No surprises. The Left has always been fascinated with pedophilia (see: the Lincoln Project, Jeffrey Epstein and his Pedo Island, allowing men in girls’ locker rooms, etc).
I fear it’s just a matter of time before the Joseph Goebbels media praises pedophilia as a “bold, healthy lifestyle” and the US Supreme Court legalizes it.
Pro-Pedophile rings in power? No way.
That’s Q-Anon stuff. Like vaccine passports, and medical death panels.
By the way, remember to get your jab, or you may end up dying in the cold outside the hospital.
Quite an abyss we are starting down.
Social progress is a progressive path and grade. That said, nothing will change, because nothing has changed. Pedophile practices, reproductive rites, etc. are merely being normalized by consensus and force under politically congruent (“=”) constructs. and the Humpty Dumpties redefine reality to sustain their comfort, and, perhaps, indulge their own special and peculiar interests. The tell-tale hearts beat sooner and ever louder.
“We?” Not us.
It is the intersection between Feminism and Diversity. In this case, Diversity wins and the young girls remain chattel.
Social liberalism. Pedophilia progresses in public. #NoJudgment #NoLabels
Remember- all cultures are equal.
Except for Western Christian based culture which is evil and worse than all other.
Sharia law does not comply with the US Constitution. DC we may have a problem. Finland you also have a problem.
Neither do Catholic canon law, halacha, or or any other religion’s legal codes. They are not expected to comply with the US constitution; it binds only the US government. And the US constitution requires government not to prohibit the free exercise of any of those legal codes.
Can you explain how the sharia courts that some communities want to establish will work here in the USA. Women don’t have all 5he same rights as under the Constitution.
Sharia courts are not just a proposal, they already exist here, and they work the same way that Jewish batei din, Catholic canon law tribunals, and the internal courts of other organizations, religions, etc. work. The US constitution is simply irrelevant to them.
let me change above to Christians won’t have their 1st A rights to profess their Christian beliefs to Muslims in places like Dearborn, MI.
Sure they do. They have the same rights in Dearborn as anywhere in the USA. If they are prevented they can call the police and the people doing so will be arrested, and/or they can sue those people. In a Michigan court operating under Michigan law and bound by the MI and US constitutions.
What possible connection do you imagine between this and sharia courts?
Michigan is in the swirl of a toilet flush, rotating at a higher speed day by day, We can thank Henry Ford for the Muslim problem in Michigan.
Someone misspelled her name. She is definitely a Ginger.
There is a difference between a young girl in America who wants to marry her boyfriend and young girls coming from Muslim countries who have been coerced into marriages with older men against their will. If they would like to leave in such a situation they should be allowed to leave otherwise what the hell does freedom mean?
Of course they’re allowed to leave. Once they’re safely in Denmark, who can stop them? The problem with what this minister did is that she ordered all couples involving a minor to be forcibly separated, no matter how much they wanted to be together. Officials wouldn’t even bother finding out whether there was any coercion involved. The mere fact that one or both of the couple were under 18 was enough to separate them. And that would be illegal here too, so it’s a good thing it’s illegal in Denmark.
“forcibly separated, no matter how much they wanted to be together”.
Ha ha ha
There’s nothing funny about it. How would you like it if someone did that to you and your spouse? That is what this criminal ex-minister did, and she belongs in prison for it.
Feel bad for the judge who tried to do what is right, Denmark too keeping this will turn into the Caliphate along with many western Europe.
I’m reminded of the case in Kentucky were a certain specious Clerk of the Court refused to issue marriage licenses to certain applicants.
It is well for government functionaries to keep “their place and position” within a system in mind. You find “Karens” where you find them and this seems to be another instance of someone exceeding their authority.
My mother was 16 when she married my father, who was 21, not unusual in America in the 40’s and before.
People were much, much more mature and functional back then. A young American city woman of 16 is just about useless today, not even trustworthy to babysit.
When your father was 21, he was the functional equivalent of today’s 45 year olds.
There’s a reason we kicked ass in WW2 – and why we’re going to lose WW3.
You just destroyed your own case. None of the Arab teenagers arriving in Denmark are as immature or as coddled as American teenagers today. They’ve experienced hardship and are much more comparable to American teenagers of the WW2 era. If they are voluntarily in a marriage, it’s none of anyone’s business. And if they’re not, they can just walk away from it; they’re in a free country now.
I wonder if this is a naive viewpoint? We’re talking about “brides” as young as nine here. Where do you imagine they can “just walk away” in a foreign country? I don’t care who are you or what lack of American coddling you have, a nine-year-old is a nine-year-old. What’s she supposed to do? Walk away . . . to what? To where? Even the “old” brides, who are still in their teens, are to do what? Go where? “Just walk away” sounds great, but it takes nothing real into consideration. These are dependent children with zero life skills or education or any idea at all about “freedom” in any sense we understand it. This is a truly heartless response, Milhouse, and I don’t see you as a heartless person. What are you doing here?
I think Milhouse is heartless and a contrarian
No, we are not “talking about “brides” as young as nine here”. We are in fact talking about brides as old as seventeen. How can you justify separating all such couples, just because you’re worried that some minor brides might be coerced. If the minister were genuinely worried about nine-year-olds she should have made the case for separating them, and the outcome might have been different. But there’s nothing in evidence to suggest there even were any nine-year-olds involved, so dragging them in for rhetorical purposes is just dishonest.
And yes, they can walk away, just as any Danish w0man can walk away from an abusive marriage. Just go to the nearest policeman, social worker, teacher, etc. It’s a free country and nobody can stop them. If they’re unaware that they can do this, they can be given that information. Who could object to that? Nobody. But that’s not what this minister did. This minister heartlessly ripped genuine families apart, with no reason whatsoever to believe that there was anything untoward about them, and you are heartlessly supporting her in doing so.
The very definition of bigotry is treating individual cases as if they were simply part of an homogeneous mass, and applying statistical generalizations to each. There is no difference between saying “Some Moslem women are coerced into marriage while minors, so we will forcibly separate all Moslem couples in which the wife is a minor”, and saying “Some black people steal, so we will simply arrest all black people”. I have no problem with retail staff following black customers around the store in order to catch them if they should steal, but you have to catch them before doing anything to them. If you don’t you must assume they didn’t steal, because each customer is an individual. Likewise unless you have evidence that a specific wife is being coerced to stay in her marriage, you must assume she is not. You can suspect otherwise, but you have no right to act without evidence.
We are talking about young brides in a terrible situation. Milhouse is talking spin. He said, “they are being forcibly separated, no matter how much they wanted to be together”
I laughed his stupid comment about these young girls being sold to old men and not wanting to be separated—separated, from men who condsider them to be their property. But good old Milhouse puts a spin on it, “How would you like it if someone did that to you and your spouse?” See the spin? Only an idiot would make that comparison.
Then he says, “That is what this criminal ex-minister did, and she belongs in prison for it.”
Spin, spin, spin. Milhouse is the spin zone.
A child bride is a very different thing form a Muslim country. Those children are literally sold to those men, sometimes at 7,8 years old. Extremely disgusting.
Those children would be in fear to even question it. How could they trust any of us when their own parents sold them to these often 50 year old men.
I know I have seen young brides married to an old man at Walmart, 3 of them with numerous children, all with wht cards. He was in the middle of them at the self check out. Then I saw them all in the same van. It was disgusting. They weren’t child brides, but they were young and he was at least 50.
We not only allow it, we pay for it. They declare them as “family” and get multiple thousands of our hard earned money to support them
Often these people are literate and have very low IQ’s from inbreeding.
It’s a real shit show.
That is pure bigotry. To state as a fact that a teenage bride was “literally sold”, for no other reason than that the couple came from a Moslem country, is illogical, contrary to reality, and bigoted. If a US official made statements like that, it would be taken by the courts as evidence that his or her official acts were motivated by bigotry rather than by legitimate reasons, and would get them overturned, just like in Denmark. If you suspect something is wrong in a specific case, the only legitimate thing to do is to investigate and look for evidence in that case. Nothing about any other case is relevant; all evidence relating to other cases must be ignored.
Milhouse, stop drinking.. please, there is help out there.
There is no bigotry in the truth I stated
Come on – he has to argue about SOMETHING.
He argues against a position for the sake of argument.
He must be a joy to take a road trip with.
Makes me miss Rags
“This makes me miss Rags.” Yeah, Good old Ragspierre. Milhouse is a piss poor substitute.
Milhouse – Please! Do you really think a 14-year-old girl in ANY culture has the true capacity to understand what a lifetime commitment like marriage is all about?
Spare us the cultural relativism; we get too much of that already from our media, cultural and Tech institutions.
Yes, of course she understands what marriage is. She’s seen it all her life. She doesn’t know anything else; she’s never seen casual relationships and may not know they’re possible.
The point is that 14-year-olds can marry here in the USA, and yet this minister was not separating all American couples arriving in Denmark, and we’d be outraged if she had done so. So what’s the difference that they’re Moslem? Without particular evidence about each specific couple what she did was pure bigotry.
Public schools groom kids to think it’s normal. Hollyweird was doing that decades ago.
Hollyweird? If you visit, you’d better get your kids one of these:
https://ijact.in/index.php/ijact/article/view/106
16 would’ve been a more logical cutoff age. That’s the marriageable age in many US states and in some European countries as well. If coercion was involved though, as is common in muslim marriages, then that’s a different story,
Of course it is, if there’s evidence of it in a specific case. And if this minister had simply required immigration officials to inquire into each marriage (regardless of age, since adults are also often coerced in Moslem countries) and determine whether the wife truly consents to be with the husband, nobody would have objected and she’d still have her job.
If this were any other European country, I’d celebrate the left crushing the country in to Islamist submission as Ha-shem’s revenge for the Shoah.
Even on Denmark, though, I don’t have the desire to support it that I used to. They have banned shechitah and their left is an looney Jew-hating as the left everywhere else in the West.
The Danes only saved their own Jews. They had no problem turning foreign Jews over to the Germans.
Ditto for the Bulgarians, who saved all their own Jews but sent all of Macedonia’s Jews straight to Auschwitz.
As a dane I will just clarify some points.
Stojbjerg was not convicted because she was seperating “childbrides” from their spouses, but because she did not follow due process, and because her definition of “child” was anybody under the age of 18. That meant that a married couple of 18 & 17 would be seperated without an administrative review of their case. This is a blatant violation of danish administrative law.
Personally I don’t understand, why they just didn’t review the cases before the seperation, because there is no legal problem with seperating true “childbrides” from their spouses. An administrative review can be done in less than a day, if the ressources are dedicated to it.
Exactly.
And the reason she didn’t order that is because her true motive was bigotry.
Wow. Just wow. Who would have thought that Danish law and the European Convention on Human Rights would protect the heinous and vile practice of child brides and those “married” to children. Disgusting. Simply disgusting.
The unvarnished truth is that women are treated like shit by Muslims. The only difference is to what degree they are used and abused.