This article discusses the functioning of the decentralised Danish Rigsfællesskab, highlighting the dominance of Danish authorities and legal inequalities.
This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced manuscript - post peer review - of an article accepted for publication in the Nordic Journal of International Law (Brill / Nijhoff) following peer review, deposited in Zenodo in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy Sharing your Work / Self-Archiving The published article is: Lorenzo Villaverde, J. M. (2023). The Danish Rigsfællesskab: A Decentralised State Which is Not Fully Aware of Being One. Nordic Journal of International Law, 92(2), 283-306. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718107-bja10065 available at https://brill.com/view/journals/nord/92/2/article-p283_005.xml?srsltid=AfmBOoqJfveGe50t-kyxBNqr7tg5rpTVn5QrM3Ov9PaUzVfpNuAud-kI Please refer to the published article for accurate use and referencing, found at: https://brill.com/view/journals/nord/nord-overview.xml Abstract: The Danish Realm or Rigsfællesskab is a decentralised state in which the Faroe Islands and Greenland each count with a home-rule, holding the executive and legislative power over transferred matters. The paper discusses several issues concerning this decentralised legal framework its functioning. In spite of what is stated in the home-rule arrangements about equality between parties, there is a dominant position of Danish authorities and Danish law. ‘Danish central authorities’ (Rigsmyldigheder) do not exist strictly speaking since the Danish authorities act as authorities for both Denmark proper and the Danish Realm. The mechanism for solving conflicts of competences is also questioned as non-functional, potentially reinforcing inequality and uncertainty. A territorial limit to Greenlandic/Faroese laws is of little use when the criterion for application of the laws is personal, not territorial. Finally, it is argued that the bilateral nature of the home-rule arrangements is not suitable for a three-parts decentralised state in which all involved laws are lex fori.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
José María Lorenzo Villaverde (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: