The Copenhagen principles on the handling of detainees: implications for the procedural regulation of internment

The Copenhagen Principles on the Handling of Detainees in International Military Operations were released in October 2012 after a five-year long process involving states and certain organizations. The Principles address a number of issues concerning the handling and transfer of detainees. They apply in military operations conducted by states abroad in the context of non-international armed conflicts and peace operations. This article focuses on those principles that address the procedural regulation of internment (ie preventive, security detention), as it is here that the current law is particularly unclear. On the one hand, the treaty provisions applicable in non-international armed conflicts contain no rules on the procedural regulation of internment, in comparison with the law of international armed conflict. On the other hand, the relevant rules under international human rights law (IHRL) appear derogable in such situations. This article demonstrates that the approach taken to this issue in the Copenhagen Principles is one which essentially draws on the procedural rules applicable to civilian internment in the international armed conflicts. These rules adopt standards that are lower than those under IHRL. Reference is then made to other recent practice, which illustrates that the Copenhagen Principles do not apply in a legal vacuum. In particular, two recent judicial developments highlight the continued relevance of human rights law and domestic law, respectively, in regulating detention operations in the context of international military operations. Compliance with the Copenhagen Principles may not, therefore, be sufficient for detention to be lawful.

From Rio to Copenhagen: multilateral agreements, disagreements and situated actions

Governing climate change is arguably one of the most complex problems, environmental or otherwise, that the global community has had to contend with. This chapter highlights the innovations in governance that have characterized the global climate change regime as it sought to respond to and manage these complexities, political imperatives and competing interests. We suggest that the key contestations and innovations within climate governance can be understood in terms of four themes/questions all of which relate to issues of justice and equity.

How to avoid Copenhagen : An experimental economic approach to climate negotiations

This study got its origin in the failed climate negotiations in the Copenhagen 2009 summit. By conducting a public good game, with participants from China and Sweden, my study indicates that previous studies on public good games can predict the outcome of the game to a quit large extent even though most of my statistical tests came out statistically insignificant. My study also indicates that by framing the game as climate negotiations there were no statistical significant difference on the level of contributions in comparison to the unframed versions of the game. The awareness of the issues with emissions, global warming and other environmental problems are pretty high but even so when push comes to shove gains in the short run are prioritized to gains in the long run. There are however hypothetical willingness to come to term with the environmental issues. The results of the study indicate that the outcome of the Copenhagen summit can be avoidable but would need additional experiments made on cultural differences and behavior.

Integration eller illusion : et deviance-perspektiv

Integration or illusion – a deviance perspective Denmark experienced one of its most successful periods of economic growth in 2004– 2008 with a tremendous reduction of unemployment, which in June 2008 was around. 1.5 percent, far below the expected level of structural unemployment. In the wake of this development the lack of utilization of migrants’ educations and skills became, once again, a core concern. The political, societal and academic debate followed to a great extent the traditional top-down approach to the problem and revolved around two axes: 1. How effective the labour market was/is to make use of migrants’ skills. 2. Whether there were patterns of over-education as expression of institutional and societal discrimination. The focus of the present study is, however, quite different: We examine the pattern of deviance in relation to labour market participation (not integration), and instead of searching for explanations for the lack of integration, we attempt to identify and explain the deviance pattern as a product of institutionally inherent possibilities and barriers on the one hand and articulating immigrants as rational actors (not victims) on the other. We argue that deviance is not only a more fruitful theoretical and analytical framework than integration and discrimination. Taking departure in empirical evidence on immigrants’ preferences and behaviour as bounded rational actors, and how they actually articulate their everyday life practical experiences, including adjustment of what they want and what they can, the deviance perspective, we believe, also reduces the theoretical and normative biases, that characterises the discrimination and integration framework, and provide more reliable explanations. 

Hjælp til selvcensur

Self-help and self-censorship: A self-help cultural perspective on organizational silence This paper seeks to explain silence in the workplace through an analytical perspective derived from Judith Butlers work on censorship, and in this way suggest an alternative to explanations in the existing literature on employee silence, which are often tied to the actions and motivations of the individual subject. It is thus argued that self-help books can be seen as indicative of a pervasive culture of self-improvement, which among other things promotes the absence of criticism in the workplace. The empirical point of departure for this argument is the two bestselling self-help books The secret by Rhonda Byrne and The 7 habits of highly effective people by Stephen Covey. Theoretically, the paper applies Butlers notion of ”implicit censorship” where censorship is understood as productive in the sense of being constitutive of language. Hence, in the analysis it is shown how discursive regimes in self-help literature tend to be constructed in such a way, that explicit criticism cannot emerge as a meaningful activity, and is thus implicitly censored.

Forskningscirklar - en arena där lärares syn på vad deras arbete resulterar i kan utmanas. : Paper presented at NFPS:s conference in Copenhagen 7-9 March, 2003

Lärare kan i första hand antas bilda sig sin uppfattning om resultatet av sitt arbete genom vad de kan observera av det som sker med deras elever. Vad har då denna erfarenhetsbaserade kunskap för betydelse för hur de uppfattar sitt arbete? I Sverige har t ex forskningscirklar använts i skolan, där lärare arbetar tillsammans med forskare, för att bearbeta frågeställningar som lärare möter i sin vardag. Kan forskningscirklar då vara ett sätt att utmana lärares syn på vilka resultat som deras arbete leder till?Från dessa utgångspunkter förefaller det vara relevant att ställa frågan om dessa sk forskningscirklar också kan vara en mötesplats där lärares syn på vilka resultat som deras arbete leder till utmanas? Följande frågeställning formuleras:• På vilken utsträckning kan forskningscirklar fungera som ett sätt att öppna nya infallsvinklar på hur lärare ser på resultatet av sitt arbete?

Från traditionellt akademiskt bibliotek till modern lärmiljö : Högskolan Dalarnas bibliotek – förväntningar och resultat

I denna rapport beskrivs idéerna bakom Högskolan Dalarnas prisbelönta bibliotek i Falun. Planerings- och byggprocessen beskrivs och det färdiga resultatet utvärderas, samt de erfarenheter som har gjorts delas.

Temporary protection and the refugee convention in Australia,Denmark, and Germany

This paper reports on a comparative study of temporary protection (TP) mechanisms in Australia and selected European jurisdictions. Specifically, it analyzes policy developments and trends in the use of TP mechanisms in Denmark, Germany, and Australia through a systematic examination of the evolution of “substitute protection” mechanisms; their implications for “effective protection” and their impacts on key stakeholders. The policy analyses are augmented by interviews and survey questionnaires with key NGO service providers in the three target jurisdictions. The paper argues that the traditional link between Refugee Convention protection and national territorial jurisdiction and responsibility is being undermined by extraterritorial processing and offshoring arrangements.

The impact of the expanded nursing practice on professional identify in Denmark

Purpose: This article explores the concept of professional identity of Danish nurses working in an expanded practice. The case study explores the experiences of a small group of Danish nurses with a new professional category that reaches into a domain that customarily belonged to physicians. The aim of this case study was to explore the impact of “nurse consultations,” representing an expanded nursing role, of 5 nurses focusing on their perception of autonomy, self-esteem, and confidence.


Methods: The case study used semistructured interviews with 5 participants triangulated and validated with participant observations, a focus group interview, and theoretically derived insights.


Findings: This study indicates that nurses working within a new expanded professional practice see themselves as still engaged in nursing and not as substitute physicians. The study also suggests that the involved nurses gained a higher sense of autonomy, self-esteem, and confidence in their practice. These elements have a positive impact on their professional identity.


Conclusion: The research demonstrates that for the nurses involved in expanded professional practice, the boundaries of professional practice have shifted significantly. The research indicates that an expanded practice generates a new domain within the professional identity of nurses.

The Copenhagen school on your in Kyrgyzstan : is securitization theory useable outside Europe?

The article argues that the theoretical framework presented by the Copenhagen School is currently unsuited to empirical studies outside the West owing to two factors. First, the presence of the ‘Westphalian straitjacket’ has prevented explicit interrogation of the normative concepts underlying the framework: there is a presumption that European understandings of society and the state are universal. Second, the centrality of the speech-act for securitization to the exclusion of other forms of expression, such as physical action, results in the theoretical framework producing a Westernized description of a given situation. The extent to which these factors limit the utility of the concepts of securitization and societal security in a non-Western setting is illustrated through the case of the overthrow of the government in Kyrgyzstan in March 2005. This example forms an empirical critique to highlight how theoretical shortcomings result in a simplified and Westernized description of the situation that does not take into account the specific local socio-political context. The article concludes that if the Copenhagen School’s theoretical framework is to be considered suitable for universal application, future theoretical developments must explicitly address the issues discussed to enable progress in escaping International Relations’ Westphalian straitjacket.