This report entails a study of the law Lømmelpakken, which was enacted by the VKO-government in Denmark by the 1st of December 2009 aimed at the demonstrations during the climate conference in Copenhagen. The report examines whether experts affect the outcome of the legislation. As Lømmelpakken has been criticised for violating the rule of law, the report examines how the rule of law was considered in the hearing statements and whether this was taken into consideration in the debate in the Parliament. The hearing statements were categorised into themes guided by the core theme: predictability of the law. The themes found were: obscure rule of law, the separation of the powers, preventive detentions, the principle of legality and the principle of proportionality. Furthermore two themes occurred during the coding of the hearing statements: unintended affects and judicial political aspects. Thereafter it was investigated whether the debate in the Parliament reflected the hearing statements. The conclusion was that experts did not affect the outcome of the legislation. On the contrary, the politicians affect the outcome in close cooperation with the police. At the same time the notion of rule of law is not used in its judicial sense, it is equated with security where the citizen is protected against “the other” rather than against interventions from the state. One could argue that the state of Denmark is slowly, but steadily, moving away from a constitutional state toward a police state.
|Uddannelser||Offentlig Administration, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Bachelor el. kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||25 maj 2010|
- offentlige forvaltningsprincipper