How to Stop Extradition from Denmark: Grounds for Refusal, Appeals and Deadlines

In Denmark, the court decides whether a person may be surrendered abroad. Under section 35 of the Danish Extradition Act (udleveringsloven), the district court for the area where the person lives or stays decides on the prosecution service’s request. If neither venue applies, the case may be heard where the person was arrested. A first appeal must be filed within three days of the ruling; if the person was not present when it was delivered, the service rule may determine when the period starts. Obtain the ruling and confirm the service date immediately.

This page focuses on refusal grounds, appeals and urgent protection. For the end-to-end process, see Extradition from Denmark: How the Procedure Works. Act No. 117 of 11 February 2020 moved the decision from the executive to the courts; the Ministry of Justice and Copenhagen City Court are not a universal route.

Identify the route before choosing a defence

The applicable refusal grounds differ by destination. Do not apply third-country rules automatically to EU or Nordic cases.

Route	Main legal basis	First checks
EU Member State, except Finland and Sweden	EU surrender rules in §§ 13–16, plus general safeguards in §§ 2–8	Check listed offences, penalty thresholds, dual criminality where required and refusal grounds. See the separate European Arrest Warrant procedure.
United Kingdom	EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), applied with Danish law and specific variations	The UK is not an EU member and this is not an EAW. Check the TCA route and its differences from EU surrender.
Finland, Iceland, Norway or Sweden	Nordic Arrest Warrant under § 9, plus general safeguards in §§ 2–8	Check the Nordic warrant and applicable refusal grounds; do not assume third-country rules or deadlines apply unchanged.
Outside the EU, UK and Nordic group	Eligibility §§ 18–22; refusal grounds §§ 23–28; general safeguards §§ 2–8	Check treaty basis, penalty threshold, evidence, political or military offence issues, limitation, an in-absentia sentence and return risks.

Denmark is party to the 1957 European Convention on Extradition (ETS No. 24), subject to reservations. It may refuse for particularly serious personal consequences linked to age, health or other personal reasons, or where a sentence was imposed by a special court. Under Denmark’s reservation to Article 12, where special circumstances indicate, the authorities may require evidence establishing a sufficient presumption of guilt; extradition may be refused if the evidence is insufficient. This treaty-based evidence request is distinct from the statutory § 23 safeguard for third-country requests. The former one-year threshold reservation was withdrawn on 23 September 2002. Nordic cases use the Nordic Arrest Warrant. Bill L 31, introduced on 7 October 2026, proposes EU surrender changes; as of 26 October 2026 it is not law, so check its status and commencement date.

Which refusal grounds apply to a third-country request?

Read the general and third-country provisions together. “Must not be extradited” is a mandatory bar if the test is met; “may be refused” leaves discretion. The court checks legality and statutory grounds; it does not conduct a full retrial of guilt.

Ground	Legal basis and effect	Evidence to prepare
Age	§ 2: no extradition if the person was below Denmark’s age of criminal responsibility when the act occurred. Mandatory if proved.	Birth record and date of conduct.
Same conduct already decided	§ 3: a conviction or acquittal in Denmark, a Nordic or EU state can bar extradition. A third-country judgment may support refusal if statutory enforcement conditions are met.	Final judgment and proof of enforcement, if required.
Danish proceedings	§ 4(1): if prosecution was discontinued in Denmark, extradition is permitted only if the statutory conditions for reopening are met. Under § 4(2), extradition for prosecution may be refused where Danish proceedings for the same conduct are already underway and the case should be pursued in Denmark.	Danish case decisions and file; evidence of the person’s connection to Denmark.
Conduct in Denmark / dual criminality	§ 5 bars extradition where the conduct was wholly or partly committed in Denmark and is not punishable under Danish law. EU rules have separate dual-criminality rules and listed-offence exceptions; see dual criminality in extradition cases.	Chronology, location evidence and Danish-law comparison.
Persecution or prohibited treatment	§ 6(1) bars serious persecution because of origin, group, religion, political opinion or political circumstances. § 6(2) covers torture or inhuman treatment; § 6(3) covers other breaches of Denmark’s international obligations. This general safeguard applies across routes.	Threats, medical records, likely facility, reliable reports and evidence on monitoring assurances.
Insufficient evidential basis	§ 23 requires refusal if special circumstances show insufficient evidence for the accusation or judgment. This is not a retrial; a bare denial of guilt is insufficient.	Contradictions, mistaken identity, unreliable documents or material undermining the foreign decision.
Military or political offence	§§ 24–25 generally bar military or political offences, subject to treaty exceptions for specified terrorism-related offences and a narrow § 25 exception.	Conduct, political context and any treaty exception.
Limitation / extraterritorial act	§ 26 bars extradition if Danish jurisdiction applies and the case is time-barred. Under § 27, refusal is possible for foreign-territory conduct beyond Denmark’s equivalent extraterritorial jurisdiction.	Dates, limitation rules, location and jurisdictional basis.
Conviction in absentia	§ 28 requires the request to establish one of the statutory safeguards before surrender to enforce an in-absentia sentence: timely personal or official notice of the trial and warning that it could proceed in the person’s absence; awareness of the trial and actual representation by a lawyer authorised for that case; after service of the judgment, express notice of the right to a fresh review or appeal and its deadline, without the person exercising that right; or personal service immediately after surrender together with notice of the right and deadline.	Summons, service and hearing records, lawyer’s authority, judgment and review rules.

Nationality is not a universal bar. Under § 7, a Danish citizen or permanent resident surrendered for prosecution may be required to return to Denmark to serve a custodial sentence; this is a condition the court may impose, not an automatic right. Section 18 sets separate eligibility rules for Danish nationals sought by third countries.

How can you prove a real human-rights risk?

Section 6 matters where the person fears persecution, torture, prison violence, extreme overcrowding, lack of essential medical care or a serious denial of justice. General claims of poor conditions are rarely enough: identify the likely facility, foreseeable harm, personal exposure and why safeguards would not remove the risk.

Use recent reports from the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture, UN mechanisms or established rights organisations; name the facility or region and report date.
Link reports to the person’s medical vulnerability, threats, political or group profile, previous detention or concrete risk of violence.
Test who issued diplomatic assurances, whether they identify the facility and conditions, and whether compliance can be independently monitored.
Translate key documents and identify their source and date. Under § 35(5), the court may request additional information.

In Supreme Court case 7/2024 (13 August 2024), the Court refused extradition to Moldova under § 6(2) because the record established a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3. The Court did not treat the Moldovan assurances as sufficient to neutralise that risk. The decision is fact-specific, not a blanket bar on extradition to Moldova. In a comparable case, counsel should connect current independent reports to the person’s likely detention conditions and detention length, and test the practical reliability and monitoring of any assurances.

In case 3/2025 (20 June 2025), the Supreme Court upheld extradition to Ukraine on the basis of detailed detention information and guarantees assessed alongside the person’s circumstances; it found no real risk under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In companion case 2/2025, the Court upheld refusal because the person was particularly vulnerable. The official summary verifies both outcomes. There is no blanket rule: assurances matter, but individual vulnerability can still make surrender unlawful.

What are the deadlines?

Appeal deadlines differ from target decision and transfer periods. A target period is not automatically a release date.

Step	Deadline or rule	What to do
District-court decision	§ 35(6): appeal (kære) to the competent High Court within 3 days of the ruling. If the person was absent when it was delivered, the service rule may control the start date; check it immediately under § 910.	Obtain the written ruling and contact counsel immediately; do not wait for every translation.
Further appeal to the Supreme Court	Normally apply to Procesbevillingsnævnet within 14 days after the High Court decision, under Administration of Justice Act § 968a(2). If the person was not present when the decision was delivered, the period runs from service; exceptional late permission may be granted within one year.	Leave is exceptional. Assess whether the case raises a point of principle and separately ask whether a stay is needed.
Third-country alert; formal request missing	Under § 53(2), measures based on an international alert must be lifted if the formal request is not received within 30 days after arrest, unless the court extends the period in a special case.	Record the arrest date and ask the court to verify receipt. This is not a 30-day limit on the whole case.
Decision on Nordic / EU warrant	§ 37: target of 30 days from arrest for Nordic cases and 60 days for EU cases; with consent, 3 and 10 days.	These are target periods, not automatic-release rules.
Final decision on a third-country request	No comparable fixed statutory deadline applies to the final decision.	Seek a reasoned update, but do not assume the court can impose a deadline on the prosecution’s investigation.
Transfer after finality	The published text of § 38(2) says transfer should occur as soon as possible and, where possible, within 5 days (Nordic), 10 days (EU and the UK route under the TCA) or 30 days (third country). A court may extend in special circumstances; detention under § 38(3) must otherwise be lifted if the applicable period expires without transfer.	Check when the ruling became final and whether an extension was ordered. A Supreme Court leave application does not itself guarantee a stay.
ECtHR interim measure	There is no ordinary fixed number of days for a Rule 39 request; it must be made urgently where irreparable harm is imminent.	Include domestic rulings, evidence of risk and expected transfer timing.

Appeal, constitutional arguments and detention are separate issues

District court: raise each ground, cite the subsection and file evidence. Section 34 provides appointed defence counsel unless the person chooses a lawyer; costs are generally public, although the court may shift them in special circumstances.
High Court: appeal within three days. Explain legal errors, overlooked evidence and information still needed. The court is Østre Landsret or Vestre Landsret according to the district, not automatically a Copenhagen court.
Supreme Court: apply for leave within 14 days, subject to the service rule above. The application does not automatically suspend execution; address any needed stay separately.
Constitutional arguments: Denmark has no separate constitutional court or standalone constitutional complaint that automatically blocks surrender. Raise constitutional and human-rights arguments in the ordinary courts. A constitutional label does not replace the three-day appeal deadline.
Detention: challenging extradition and challenging remand custody are distinct. Obtain the current custody order, expiry date and next review date; an appeal does not automatically release the person.

Supreme Court case 95/2022 (13 April 2023) warns against relying on delay alone. The Court held that the provisions invoked gave ordinary courts no power to set a deadline for the prosecution’s investigation of a third-country request. An Article 3 objection to extradition did not by itself create an Article 13 remedy for the duration of that investigation.

Can Strasbourg, UN bodies, asylum or INTERPOL stop transfer?

These routes do not replace a Danish appeal. The European Court of Human Rights may indicate a Rule 39 interim measure only exceptionally where irreparable harm is imminent, often involving a substantiated risk to life or of torture or inhuman treatment. A Strasbourg application does not itself suspend transfer. See Application to the European Court of Human Rights.

Denmark accepts individual complaints under the ICCPR Optional Protocol and CAT Article 22, subject to jurisdiction and admissibility requirements. Neither a communication nor an interim-measure request automatically stays surrender.

The same persecution evidence may support an asylum claim, but extradition and asylum are separate tracks. Inform counsel in both and do not assume an asylum application automatically suspends surrender. See extradition versus deportation.

An INTERPOL Red Notice or diffusion is not a Danish extradition order. If its data are inaccurate or non-compliant, a separate request may be made to the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCF); this does not automatically pause the Danish case. See INTERPOL Red Notice removal and CCF representation.

Practical decision tree

If arrested: ask for counsel and the warrant or request, record the arrest date and destination, and track § 53(2)’s 30-day rule for a third-country alert.
If the district court ruled: preserve the three-day appeal period and send counsel the ruling, hearing record and evidence.
If the risk concerns persecution or detention: identify the likely facility, connect reports to the person and test assurances against conditions and monitoring.
If there is an in-absentia sentence: obtain summons and service records, the defence record, judgment and retrial or appeal rules; § 28 requires a specified safeguard.
If extradition was refused but further review is sought: check permission and any separate custody or stay order; do not rely on press reports alone.

Hypothetical example: A person arrested on a non-EU request reports political threats and abuse in the named prison. A useful challenge would attach recent facility evidence, details of the threats, relevant medical records and reasons the assurances do not protect this person. Counsel would raise § 6 and preserve the three-day appeal deadline.

Mistakes that can defeat a challenge

Waiting for the full foreign file before contacting counsel despite the three-day appeal period.
Arguing only “I am innocent”: extradition is not normally a retrial, and § 23 requires special circumstances showing insufficient evidence.
Submitting country reports without linking them to the person and likely detention conditions.
Assuming citizenship, asylum, a CCF request or a Strasbourg application automatically bars or pauses surrender.
Confusing consent to surrender with waiver of a hearing or waiver of speciality. Under § 36, consent is given in court and its consequences must be explained.
Assuming a Supreme Court leave application automatically suspends execution or that a challenge to extradition is the same as a challenge to detention.

Because the appeal period may be only three days, seek prompt advice from a Danish extradition lawyer. If useful, you can request a case assessment. This is general information, not advice on the outcome of an individual case.

Questions about stopping extradition from Denmark

Does an appeal automatically stop transfer?

No. The first appeal must be filed within three days, and a later request for Supreme Court permission does not itself guarantee a stay. Counsel should seek any necessary interim order expressly.

Can a Red Notice alone justify extradition?

No. A Red Notice is an international alert, not the final Danish extradition decision. For a third-country case, § 53 addresses provisional measures before the formal request arrives; the request and statutory conditions still need examination.

Can Denmark refuse extradition because prison conditions are poor?

Yes, if evidence establishes a real risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment under § 6 and Denmark’s international obligations. General reports should be linked to the person and likely conditions. Specific, credible assurances can affect the outcome.

Does Denmark have a constitutional court?

No separate constitutional court hears extradition appeals. Constitutional and human-rights arguments are raised in ordinary courts; a further Supreme Court challenge generally requires permission.