The Danish government is considering a ban on the Islamist organization Hizb ut-Tahrir following recent controversial statements made by a member regarding Danish traditions. This marks the fourth attempt to ban the organization, with previous attempts in 2004, 2008, and 2015 being rejected as unconstitutional.

The debate was reignited after Sebastian Østerfelt, a convert and member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, declared the Danish tradition of student graduation parades as “haram” on social media. This statement, along with the organization’s history of controversial statements and convictions, has prompted renewed calls for a ban.

Hizb ut-Tahrir, founded in Jerusalem in 1953, aims to unite Muslims under a global caliphate and operates in over 45 countries. While the organization claims to be peaceful, critics argue that its ultimate goal is to replace democratic constitutions with Sharia law.

The organization has been accused of dividing Danish society by creating a distinction between “true Muslims” and others, including Jews, homosexuals, and other minorities. Several prominent spokesmen have been convicted of inciting violence against Jews, including instances of distributing anti-Semitic leaflets. More recently, a member was convicted of glorifying Hamas’ attack on Israel in 2023.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is already banned in several countries, including the United Kingdom, Turkey, and Germany. In Germany, the ban was implemented because the constitution allows for the prohibition of groups seeking to abolish democracy before they act on their plans.

Despite facing a membership crisis in 2019, with an estimated 60 to 80 members, the organization’s influence and activities remain a concern. Experts suggest that banning the organization might not eliminate its extremist ideas but could instead drive them underground, leading to further radicalization.

Some argue that instead of a ban, Danish authorities should continue monitoring Hizb ut-Tahrir and focus on curtailing its ability to exert social control within local communities. This approach aims to protect vulnerable individuals from the extremists’ influence while allowing the organization’s ideas to be exposed and challenged openly.