What to know as Greenland presents its forced contraception reports this week

The findings will arrive just one day after the Danish parliament is due to finalise compensation legislation for affected women, raising questions about how the reports’ assessment of responsibility will sit alongside Denmark’s existing response. Greenland will present two long-awaited reports on Friday 28 August examining human rights violations linked to historic cases in which Greenlandic women and girls were subjected to the insertion of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and other forms of contraception, including whether Denmark’s actions could meet the legal definition of genocide. An intrauterine device (IUD) is a form of contraception placed in the uterus to prevent pregnancy. More than 4,000 Greenlandic women and girls had IUDs inserted during a Danish-led contraception campaign that began in the 1960s, with many later saying they had not been properly informed or had not consented. The findings will arrive just one day after the Danish parliament is due to finalise compensation legislation for affected women, raising questions about how the reports’ assessment of responsibility will sit alongside Denmark’s existing response. Denmark ran Greenland's health care system until 1992. In 2024, the Greenlandic self-government asked independent experts to investigate whether the Danish state committed a genocide and violated international law. "As a society, we must have all the facts on the table, but we must also find ways to move forward together. Therefore, the investigation will also address how the trauma caused by the Contraception Case has affected society over generations,” the Greenlandic government wrote in a statement in 2024. The results are now due to be published on Friday. The new investigation is separate from a previous joint Danish-Greenlandic historical report published in September 2025, which was followed by a public apology from Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen. While that investigation reconstructed what happened and how the contraception programme was carried out, the new reports examine how those practices should be understood under human rights and international law. What the reports will cover The reports being published on Friday will not themselves establish legally binding responsibility, according to legal experts. “[There will be] no strict legal effect from the reports. However, depending on the results, they might lead to political action,” Sune Klinge, an associate professor specialising in constitutional law at the University of Copenhagen, told Euronews Health. Some experts say the case is unlikely to meet the legal threshold for genocide. “The [United Nations] Genocide Convention coupled with judicial practice will be the legal basis for a finding of responsibility for genocide. Genocide is based on the perpetrator’s special intent to commit the acts because he or she does not recognise the group’s right to exist as a group,” Frederik Harhoff, an international law scholar at the University of Southern Denmark and former judge at the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, told Euronews Health. “It is therefore unlikely that the report will conclude that genocide took place, and if one of the two reports does so, they are wrong,” Harhoff added. He also said that while a public report may be indicative, criminal responsibility for genocide can only be established by a competent court. The reports could also identify other violations of international human rights or indigenous peoples’ rights, which could still shape the political and legal response to the case. Their significance may therefore lie partly in what governments, affected women and courts choose to do with the findings afterwards. “As genocide cannot be established for lack of the required special intent, violation of the women’s human rights becomes essential,” Harhoff added. Why are there two reports? Greenland originally appointed one four-person expert group to carry out the human rights investigation. However, the group later split into two over what the government has described as “disagreements on the professional approach”, leaving Greenland ultimately receiving two reports rather than one. The Greenlandic government said both reports subsequently underwent external review of their methodology and academic standards. It has not disclosed whether the disagreement extended to the experts’ conclusions or who authored each of the two reports. Expert urged the reports to be published sooner The timing of the publication has already attracted criticism because Denmark is moving ahead with its compensation legislation before the assessments are made public. The reports were already completed and handed to Greenland’s government in February, but their publication was delayed while they were translated, peer-reviewed and prepared for public release. The Danish parliament is due to hold the compensation bill’s final vote on Thursday, one day before the Greenlandic government presents the reports. Under the proposed scheme, eligible women subjected to contraception without consent during the period when Denmark was responsible for Greenland’s healthcare would be entitled to DKK 300,000 (€40,000). Earlier this month, one of the experts commissioned to investigate the case, Jonas Christoffersen, urged Greenland’s government to publish the reports before the Danish parliament completed its compensation legislation, arguing that lawmakers should have access to the findings before adopting the law. "It is fundamentally questionable in a democracy that the [Danish parliament] will pass a law without knowing about the reports that independent individuals have written. The Greenland Government should therefore immediately publish the reports, just as the [Danish parliament] should be made aware of them, so that the entire matter can be debated on a fully informed basis,” Christoffersen wrote in a statement. “The case has damaged the relationship between Denmark and Greenland, and in my opinion it is best for everyone if there is full transparency about the matter," he added. Harhoff also regards the parliament’s decision to proceed with the bill without waiting for the reports as a ”mistake”. However, he said the compensation scheme would not prevent Greenlandic women from pursuing further legal action if the reports identify broader human rights violations or responsibility on Denmark’s part. Klinge also said Danish politicians are “always free to amend laws and expand the scheme”, while noting that DKK 300,000 is already at the upper end of compensation awarded in comparable cases. Earlier this month, Denmark’s health minister Ida Auken said the government did not want to wait for the reports before parliament adopted a compensation scheme for Greenlandic women affected by the contraception case. “For us, it has been absolutely crucial that we do not delay anything. The women have waited long enough,” Auken told the local news agency, Ritzau.