The 24-year requirement has been a controversial topic in Danish politics for many years. But what exactly is it, and why was it introduced?
The 24-year rule is a provision in the Danish Aliens Act that sets an age limit for when foreign spouses of Danish citizens can obtain a residence permit in Denmark. As the name suggests, both parties in a marriage must be 24 years old to be eligible for family reunification.
Why was the 24-year requirement introduced?
The rule was introduced in 2002 by the then-governing Liberal Party. The aim was to prevent so-called “marriages of convenience”, where the marriage is entered into solely for the purpose of obtaining a residence permit in Denmark. The government believed that by setting an age limit, they could reduce the risk of forced marriages and ensure that marriages were more stable and based on a genuine relationship.
The 24-year rule has been a contentious issue in Danish politics since its introduction in 2002. As Bertel Haarder, the architect of the law, emphasizes, the aim was to combat forced marriages and ensure better integration. By requiring both parties in a marriage to be at least 24 years old, the intention was to ensure that marriages were more stable and based on a mutual choice. However, this approach was met with criticism from both domestic and international actors, who argued that the rule was discriminatory and limited personal freedoms.
Pia Kjærsgaard, then representing the Danish People’s Party, supported the 24-year rule even calling it a then-demand of the Danish People’s Party, but also highlighted the legal challenges of tightening immigration policy. She emphasized that conventions and international agreements often limited the possibilities for more far-reaching changes.
Criticism of the 24-year rule
However, the 24-year rule has also faced criticism. Many argue that the rule is discriminatory and violates human rights. Critics point out that the rule can affect innocent couples who have a genuine and loving relationship but do not meet the age requirement. Furthermore, they argue that it is better to assess each case individually rather than having a general age limit.
The 24-year rule has faced extensive criticism, both domestically and internationally. Critics argue that the rule is not only discriminatory but also counterproductive for Denmark. As Sikandar Siddique, Uffe Elbæk, and Susanne Zimmer have pointed out, the Danish Institute for Human Rights has questioned the basis of the rule and its compliance with international conventions. The UN Human Rights Committee has even concluded that the 24-year rule violates the right to family life.
Furthermore, experts and politicians have warned that the rule could lead Denmark to lose skilled foreign workers. Other countries with more flexible rules for family reunification become more attractive destinations. This can have negative consequences for the Danish economy and innovation. Denmark has repeatedly been criticized for hindering marriages between people in this country and spouses from abroad. This negative publicity can damage Denmark’s international reputation.
The loss of skilled foreign workers can have serious consequences for the Danish economy. A shortage of qualified labor can slow down business growth, lead to a lack of innovation, and hinder Denmark’s ability to compete in the global market. Particularly in sectors such as IT, healthcare, and research, where there is a high demand for specialized skills, the 24-year rule can be an obstacle to attracting and retaining talented employees. At the same time, the current government has highlighted the need for healthcare professionals in the future, and are encouraging future generations to take shorter, more practical educations to contribute in that regard.
The 24-year rule is a complex issue that has led to many discussions. While the purpose of the rule was to combat forced marriages, it has also had unintended consequences for many couples. It is therefore an issue that remains relevant and will continue to be debated in the years to come.
In 2023 the Rockwool Foundation’s Research Unit found a significant drop in married immigrant women at the age of 23. In 2000 46 percent of immigrant women were married by age 23, in 2008 that number had dropped to 19 percent.
