DENMARK Trends and Developments Contributed by: Christian Monberg, Simon Evers Hjelmborg, Ann Sophie Juul Hird and Linn Dyrgaard Stinus, Accura Advokatpartnerselskab
has further intensified public debate over the need for greater transparency and regulation, with critics argu - ing that such transitions may undermine democratic accountability and public trust in the political system. Lobbying is a widespread practice in Danish poli - tics whereby companies, organisations and other stakeholders attempt to influence political decisions. Despite this, Denmark does not have any legislation regarding lobbying. There is some regulation of party funding and how political parties and candidates can receive financial support. The rules aim to ensure transparency and entail, inter alia, requirements as to parties and candidates disclosing donations above a certain threshold and thereby increasing transparency as to who is financing political activities, as well as set - ting out limits on donations from individuals and com - panies. Besides this, unlike in many other countries in the European Union, lobbying is largely unregulated in Denmark. This has given rise to a national debate on the need for greater transparency and regulation when it comes to lobbying. Proposal for regulation of corruption, transparency, and conflicts of interest As noted in last year’s Trends and Developments chapter, stakeholders held differing views on how to approach the issue of lobbying regulation. Sev - eral experts and interest groups have argued that Denmark should adopt regulatory measures similar to those implemented in other countries. Many Dan - ish politicians, however, do not perceive the current situation as problematic, referring to the notion that lobbying constitutes a natural element of representa - tive democracy and serves as a means to ensure that diverse perspectives are heard. Last year, the authors stated that the debate over lobbying regulation in Denmark was far from settled. Since then, however, developments have occurred. In November 2024, a legislative proposal was intro - duced aiming to strengthen democratic accountability and prevent corruption through a series of institutional reforms. The proposal included provisions for estab - lishing clear rules specifically addressing revolving door situations involving ministers, senior civil serv - ants, and special advisers. It was proposed that a mandatory cooling-off period be introduced, aligned
with the standards applied in Germany: two years for ministers and five years for top-level civil servants, as also recommended by GRECO in its report. The proposal further sought to establish an official and transparent lobbying register for ministers, members of parliament, and civil servants. The purpose was to require these individuals to disclose their interactions with lobbyists, organisations, and companies seek - ing to influence the legislative process. However, the proposal was debated in February 2025 and ultimately rejected by a large majority in parliament in April 2025 at the first hearing. In July 2025, The Danish Prime Minister publicly stated that she does not believe cor - ruption or the revolving door phenomenon pose sig - nificant challenges in Denmark. She further remarked that some of her colleagues in politics engage in other professional activities alongside their political duties, but in her view, they do so in a responsible and prudent manner. These statements were made in response to growing criticism from both domestic and international actors, including the European Commis - sion, which in its 2025 Rule of Law Report highlighted Denmark’s lack of regulation concerning lobbying and the revolving door phenomenon. Despite this criticism (including from the European Commission) it appears that at present there is no prospect of legislation being introduced in Denmark in the near future concerning lobbying and the so-called “revolving door” phenomenon. Recent investigations and relevant case law The Elbit case (ongoing) The Elbit case serves as a strong example of a case where themes such as systemic weaknesses in trans - parency, oversight, and liability have been subject to considerable debate and have constituted the core of the matter. In early 2023, the Danish government entered into a controversial arms procurement agreement with Israeli defence contractor Elbit Systems, following Denmark’s donation of artillery systems to Ukraine. The contract valued at approximately DKK1.7 billion (EUR225 mil - lion) drew criticism due to procedural irregularities and a lack of transparency. A legal review by a Danish law firm revealed that the Ministry of Defence had failed
82 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook