Citizenship by Discretion: An Investigation at the Intersection of Law, Politics and Affect in Danish Naturalisation Exemption Cases
(2025) SOLM02 20251Department of Sociology of Law
- Abstract
- This thesis investigates how members of the Danish Naturalisation Committee navigate, exer-cise, and justify their discretionary power in exemption cases, and what this reveal about the intersection of law, politics, and affect in the governance of citizenship. While most countries treat naturalisation as an administrative procedure, Denmark stands out: citizenship is granted by parliamentary law, making decisions about one of the most consequential legal statuses inherent-ly political. Exemption cases – where applicants seeks relief from requirements such as lan-guage, self-sufficiency, or employment due to illness, disability, or exceptional circumstances – are handled behind closed doors, without public reasoning, appeal options, or... (More)
- This thesis investigates how members of the Danish Naturalisation Committee navigate, exer-cise, and justify their discretionary power in exemption cases, and what this reveal about the intersection of law, politics, and affect in the governance of citizenship. While most countries treat naturalisation as an administrative procedure, Denmark stands out: citizenship is granted by parliamentary law, making decisions about one of the most consequential legal statuses inherent-ly political. Exemption cases – where applicants seeks relief from requirements such as lan-guage, self-sufficiency, or employment due to illness, disability, or exceptional circumstances – are handled behind closed doors, without public reasoning, appeal options, or procedural safe-guards.
Drawing on interviews with committee members, public statements, media debates, and legal documents, the thesis opens this “black box” to analyse how discretion operates in practice. It combines qualitative socio-legal inquiry with theoretical perspectives on bureaucracy, discretion, affective governance, and intersectionality to trace how disability, race, and religion might inter-sect in producing disadvantages within the system.
The analysis shows three central findings. First, members’ self-understanding diverges: some act as gatekeepers protecting the state, others as advocates for applicants, and some as reluctant caseworkers uneasy with their role. Second, decisions are shaped not only by formal require-ments but also by affective and moral reasoning: applicants are judged on gratitude, motivation, “Danishness”, and cultural alignment. Furthermore, discrimination based on group-based as-sumptions is suggested. Third, even seemingly objective reference points such as medical certif-icates or international obligations are contested, reflecting tensions between legal rationality and political sovereignty.
Taken together, the findings show that citizenship in Denmark is governed not only as a legal status, but also as a political gift, embedded in cultural values, moral judgments, and affective performances. While discretion may enable case-by-case responsiveness, it also risks producing opacity, arbitrariness, and new barriers for the already vulnerable. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9211057
- author
- Sørensen, Emma Gedbjerg LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- SOLM02 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Danish Naturalisation Committee, Citizenship, Citizenship Governance, Discretion, Affective Governance, Legal Rationality, Intersectionality, Politicisation
- language
- English
- id
- 9211057
- date added to LUP
- 2025-09-22 11:30:50
- date last changed
- 2025-09-22 11:30:50
@misc{9211057,
abstract = {{This thesis investigates how members of the Danish Naturalisation Committee navigate, exer-cise, and justify their discretionary power in exemption cases, and what this reveal about the intersection of law, politics, and affect in the governance of citizenship. While most countries treat naturalisation as an administrative procedure, Denmark stands out: citizenship is granted by parliamentary law, making decisions about one of the most consequential legal statuses inherent-ly political. Exemption cases – where applicants seeks relief from requirements such as lan-guage, self-sufficiency, or employment due to illness, disability, or exceptional circumstances – are handled behind closed doors, without public reasoning, appeal options, or procedural safe-guards.
Drawing on interviews with committee members, public statements, media debates, and legal documents, the thesis opens this “black box” to analyse how discretion operates in practice. It combines qualitative socio-legal inquiry with theoretical perspectives on bureaucracy, discretion, affective governance, and intersectionality to trace how disability, race, and religion might inter-sect in producing disadvantages within the system.
The analysis shows three central findings. First, members’ self-understanding diverges: some act as gatekeepers protecting the state, others as advocates for applicants, and some as reluctant caseworkers uneasy with their role. Second, decisions are shaped not only by formal require-ments but also by affective and moral reasoning: applicants are judged on gratitude, motivation, “Danishness”, and cultural alignment. Furthermore, discrimination based on group-based as-sumptions is suggested. Third, even seemingly objective reference points such as medical certif-icates or international obligations are contested, reflecting tensions between legal rationality and political sovereignty.
Taken together, the findings show that citizenship in Denmark is governed not only as a legal status, but also as a political gift, embedded in cultural values, moral judgments, and affective performances. While discretion may enable case-by-case responsiveness, it also risks producing opacity, arbitrariness, and new barriers for the already vulnerable.}},
author = {{Sørensen, Emma Gedbjerg}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Citizenship by Discretion: An Investigation at the Intersection of Law, Politics and Affect in Danish Naturalisation Exemption Cases}},
year = {{2025}},
}