§ 29 subsection 2
The age qualification for suffrage shall be as determined by the referendum held under the Act dated March 25, 1953.
Such age qualification for suffrage may be altered at any time by statute.
A Bill passed by the Folketing (The Danish Parliament) for the purpose of such enactment shall receive the Royal Assent only when the provision for altering the age qualification for suffrage has been submitted to a referendum in accordance with sub-section (5) of section 42, and which has not resulted in the rejection of the provision.
That means :
In 1953 you had to be 23 years old to vote. Since then, the age of qualification decreased three times and today it is 18 years. To change the age of qualification the demands are two things. First of all the Folketing (The Danish Parliament) must agree to change it.
After that the suggestion must be send to referendum where a majority may not vote against it. This majority must be of at least 30% of all electors.
Who decides when the young are mature enough to vote? Why shall all young people
under 18 walk around with an opinion they cannot use for the election?
How can the entitled know that the 16 to 18 year old are less qualified to make a decision than the ones over 18? Should the young under 18 not have the opportunity to decide by themselves if they are ready to vote or not? Maybe some of the young people would be manipulated by their family and/or circle of acquaintances. Are there really some young under 18 who have decided who they think would be the best to represent them in the Folketing. Are the young people's background knowledge nuanced enough to have an opinion about politics?
At the moment you have to be 18 years old to vote. That number has been changed
three times since 1953 where the electoral age was 23 years. Should that age
be set further down so you only have to be 16 years old to vote. For all practical
purposes you are still a child, some children haven't got any idea of what their
attitude to politics is, while others are very aware of the political system
and has a background-knowledge like a person who's entitled to vote. But what
about the part of the electors that doesn't have an opinion about politics?
Do they vote like their family or circle of acquaintances, or just at a random
place on the ballot paper. It would undermine the democratic electoral system
and wouldn't reflect the populations wishes and values. It is of course a very
negative thing, but it wouldn't make at big difference because there are also
some people among the people who are entitled to vote who really don't care
about politics or just make a random choice on the ballot paper. Many people
under 18, feel powerless because they can't get influence on their society.
Is that fair? Why should some sections of the population be excluded from the
political debate, because somebody thinks that they aren't ready to make such
a final decision as it is, because of their age. If we change the electoral
age what happens next? What about people of the age of 14 or 12 years, should
they get influence on the political debate? Some people would say: "If
the people from 16 to 18 are qualified, why not the 14 to 16 people?
Grundlovsdebat / Constitution - Debate
Debate of the medians responsibility
Ændringsforslag til § 29 stk. 2. / Proposed amendment to § 29 subsection 2