Germany: Example of Regulations on Granting Emergency Visas150 Section 22 of the German Residence Act stipulates that a foreigner may be granted a residence permit for the purpose of admission from abroad, inter alia on urgent humanitarian grounds. Decisions are taken on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the specific case, human rights defenders may be covered by this regulation. Granting residence permits to human rights defenders Defenders may need to seek refuge in another country for an extended period of time. States may also grant residence permits to defenders in need of protection. Such regulations exist in a number of OSCE participating States.151 Although such regulations are desirable, they cannot replace proper protection of the rights of defenders in the countries where they operate. Denmark: Example of Regulations on Granting Residence Permits to Defenders in Trouble152 A new law entered into force on 1 July 2008 that creates the legal basis for granting a residence permit in Denmark to authors, journalists, and other writers who participate in the public debate and in the cultural life of their country and who have been offered residence by the Municipal Council through international co-operation or a network of so-called international cities of refuge that have been approved by the culture minister. The law will apply to those writers who have been the victim of reprisals or censorship because of their literary activities and are therefore unable to express their views in their country of origin or residence. Thus, the law might provide for a temporary right of residence in Denmark to a human rights defender who has written or otherwise expressed his views on certain topics, resulting in, for example, persecution, ill-treatment, or imminent danger necessitating foreign protection. Freedom of expression It is also important to ensure that defenders’ freedom of expression is protected. Defenders often criticize official bodies or call attention to issues in a way that the targets of the criticism, or the general public, may find disturbing. Such forms of expression are protected under international human rights law and OSCE commitments,153and should not be punishable. All governments that responded to the questionnaire indicated that censorship was not allowed, and that defenders were free to say what they wished within the bounds of international human rights law. In this context, it should be pointed out that criminal libel and insult provisions that punish an individual after publication can, and often do, target defenders criticizing public officials.154 As the Council of Europe’ s 150 Germany’ s response to ODIHR’ s questionnaire, 30 May 2008. Denmark’ s response to ODIHR’ s questionnaire, 2 June 2008; Germany’ s response to ODIHR’ s questionnaire, 30 May 2008; Finland’ s response to ODIHR’ s questionnaire, 1 June 2008. 152 Denmark’ s response to ODIHR’ s questionnaire, 2 June 2008. 153 See Art. 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and para. 9.1 of the OSCE’ s Copenhagen Document of 1990. 154 For examples of such cases, see the regular reports to the OSCE Permanent Council by the OSCE’ s representative on freedom of the media at <http://www.osce.org/fom/documents.html>. 151 34