Editing Impeachment (section)

=== Denmark ===
{{Main|Court of Impeachment of the Realm (Denmark)}}
In Denmark the possibility for current and former ministers being impeached was established with the [[Danish Constitution]] of 1849. Unlike many other countries [[Denmark]] does not have a [[Constitutional Court]] who would normally handle these types of cases. Instead Denmark has a special [[Court of Impeachment of the Realm (Denmark)|Court of Impeachment]] (In Danish: Rigsretten) which is called upon every time a current and former minister have been impeached. The role of the Impeachment Court is to process and deliver judgments against current and  former ministers who are accused of unlawful conduct in office. The legal content of ministerial responsibility is laid down in the Ministerial Accountability Act which has its background in section 13 of the Danish Constitution, according to which the ministers' accountability is determined in more detail by law. In Denmark the normal practice in terms of impeachment cases is that it needs to be brought up in the [[Danish Parliament]] ([[Folketing]]) first for debate between the different members and parties in the parliament. After the debate the members of the Danish Parliament vote on whether a current or former minister needs to be impeached. If there is a majority in the Danish Parliament for an impeachment case against a current or former minister, an Impeachment Court is called into session. In Denmark the Impeachment Court consists of up to 15 Supreme Court judges and 15 parliament members appointed by the Danish Parliament. The members of the Impeachment Court in Denmark serve a six-year term in this position.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thedanishparliament.dk/-/media/pdf/publikationer/english/the_constitutional_act_of_denmark_2013,-d-,pdf.ashx|title=The Danish Constitution|access-date=3 February 2021|archive-date=2 July 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210702131614/https://www.thedanishparliament.dk/-/media/pdf/publikationer/english/the_constitutional_act_of_denmark_2013,-d-,pdf.ashx|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In 1995 the former Minister of Justice Erik Ninn-Hansen from the  [[Conservative People's Party (Denmark)|Conservative People's Party]] was impeached in connection with the [[Tamil Case]]. The case was centered around the illegal processing of family reunification applications. From September 1987 to January 1989 applications for family reunification of Tamil refugees from civil war-torn [[Sri Lanka]] were put on hold in violation of Danish and International law. On 22 June 1995, Ninn-Hansen was found guilty of violating paragraph five subsection one of the Danish Ministerial Responsibility Act which says: A minister is punished if he intentionally or through gross negligence neglects the duties incumbent on him under the constitution or legislation in general or according to the nature of his post. A majority of the judges in that impeachment case voted for former Minister of Justice Erik Ninn-Hansen to receive a suspended sentence of four months with one year of probation. The reason why the sentence was made suspended was especially in relation to Ninn-Hansen's personal circumstances, in particular, his health and age – Ninn-Hansen was 73 years old when the sentence was handed down. After the verdict, Ninn-Hansen complained to the European Court of Human Rights and complained, among other things, that the [[Court of Impeachment of the Realm (Denmark)|Court of Impeachment]] was not impartial. The European Court of Human Rights dismissed the complaint on 18 May 1999. As a direct result and consequence of this case, the Conservative-led government and Prime Minister at that time Poul Schlüter was forced to step down from power.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://danmarkshistorien.dk/leksikon-og-kilder/vis/materiale/tamilsagen-1986-1995/|title=Tamilsagen 1986–1995|website=danmarkshistorien.dk|access-date=21 January 2022|archive-date=14 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220114162032/https://danmarkshistorien.dk/leksikon-og-kilder/vis/materiale/tamilsagen-1986-1995/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In February 2021 the former Minister for Immigration and Integration [[Inger Støjberg]] at that time member of the Danish Liberal Party {{lang|da|[[Venstre (Denmark)|Venstre]]|italic=no}} was impeached when it was discovered that she had possibly against both Danish and International law tried to separate couples in refugee centres in Denmark, as the wives of the couples were under legal age. According to a commission report Inger Støjberg had also lied in the Danish Parliament and failed to report relevant details to the [[Parliamentary Ombudsman]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/14/inger-st-jberg-denmark-s-ex-immigration-minister-set-to-face-impeachment-trial|title=Denmark's ex-immigraton minister set to face impeachment trial|date=14 January 2021|website=euronews|access-date=3 February 2021|archive-date=23 January 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220123214811/https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/14/inger-st-jberg-denmark-s-ex-immigration-minister-set-to-face-impeachment-trial|url-status=live}}</ref> The decision to initiate an impeachment case was adopted by the Danish Parliament with a 141–30 vote and decision (In Denmark 90 members of the parliament need to vote for impeachment before it can be implemented). On 13 December 2021 former Minister for Immigration and Integration [[Inger Støjberg]] was convicted by the special Court of Impeachment of separating asylum seeker families illegally according to Danish and international law and sentenced to 60 days in prison.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.euronews.com/2021/12/13/inger-st-jberg-denmark-s-ex-immigration-minister-convicted-of-impeachment-over-asylum-poli|title=Denmark's ex-immigration minister convicted over asylum seeker policy|date=13 December 2021|website=euronews|access-date=21 January 2022|archive-date=13 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211213164203/https://www.euronews.com/2021/12/13/inger-st-jberg-denmark-s-ex-immigration-minister-convicted-of-impeachment-over-asylum-poli|url-status=live}}</ref> The majority of the judges in the special Court of Impeachment (25 out of 26 judges) found that it had been proven that Inger Støjberg on 10 February 2016 decided that an accommodation scheme should apply without the possibility of exceptions, so that all asylum-seeking spouses and cohabiting couples where one was a minor aged 15–17, had to be separated and accommodated separately in separate asylum centers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rigsretten.dk/aktuelt/2021/12/rigsretten-har-afsagt-dom-i-sagen-mod-fhv-minister-inger-stoejberg/|title=Rigsretten – Rigsretten har afsagt dom i sagen mod fhv. minister Inger Støjberg|website=rigsretten.dk|access-date=21 January 2022|archive-date=14 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211214110649/https://rigsretten.dk/aktuelt/2021/12/rigsretten-har-afsagt-dom-i-sagen-mod-fhv-minister-inger-stoejberg|url-status=dead}}</ref> On 21 December, a majority in the Folketing voted that the sentence means that she is no longer worthy of sitting in the Folketing and she therefore immediately lost her seat.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/folketinget-har-stemt-inger-stoejberg-er-ikke-vaerdig-til-sidde-i-folketinget|title=Folketinget har stemt: Inger Støjberg er ikke værdig til at sidde i Folketinget|date=21 December 2023|website=www.dr.dk|access-date=21 January 2022|archive-date=22 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211222164320/https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/folketinget-har-stemt-inger-stoejberg-er-ikke-vaerdig-til-sidde-i-folketinget|url-status=live}}</ref>