What are the current criminal penalties for bestiality in Germany and Denmark?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Germany moved in the early 2010s to explicitly criminalize sexual acts with animals after decades of permissive interpretation, while Denmark enacted a clear criminal ban in 2015 that prescribes set custodial penalties for offenders [1] [2] [3]. Reporting supplied here gives concrete penalty figures for Denmark — up to one year’s imprisonment for a first offence and up to two years for repeat offenders — but the provided sources do not supply a statutory maximum sentence figure for Germany, only that the 2013 change made sanctions easier to impose [3] [4] [1].
1. Germany: explicit ban added to clarify enforcement, but penalty details not specified in these reports
Federal reporting shows West Germany tolerated bestiality under a harm-based threshold until the post‑reunification legislative response that led to an explicit ban in 2013; the parliamentary debate framed the amendment as intended to clarify when penalties could be imposed and to strengthen animal protection, according to the head of the parliamentary committee cited in reporting [2] [1]. The BBC noted political momentum for a ban and described the 2010s legislative move as intended to remove legal ambiguity so courts could more readily punish offenders [1]. However, the supplied sources describe the policy change and its rationale without specifying the current statutory sentence ranges or exact criminal‑code provisions now used to prosecute bestiality in Germany, so a precise statement of the criminal penalties under German law cannot be made from these documents alone [1] [2].
2. Denmark: criminal ban with defined custodial terms and fines to deter ‘animal‑sex tourism’
Denmark’s legislature approved a ban on bestiality on April 21, 2015, with the provision entering into force on July 1, 2015, after a 91–75 vote with five abstentions; the law was explicitly motivated in part by concern about animal‑sex tourism and organized commercial abuse [4]. The BBC and the Library of Congress summary report that convicted persons face up to one year in prison for a first offence and up to two years for repeat offences, and the Danish law provides for fines or imprisonment as possible punishments [3] [4]. That combination — criminal custodial terms plus the possibility of fines — was highlighted by lawmakers as a means both to punish and to deter organized or repeated conduct [4].
3. How the sources frame purpose and political friction around the laws
Coverage emphasizes animal‑welfare rationales and practical aims: Denmark framed its law as a crackdown on sex tourism and commercial exploitation of animals [4], while German debate was presented as closing a legal loophole so that harm‑based exceptions would no longer allow sexual acts with animals to escape punishment [1]. The reporting also signals dissent: at least one Danish lawmaker called the measure “superficial,” suggesting some politicians viewed the criminal ban as symbolic rather than a robust enforcement tool [4]. Those competing framings — protection and deterrence versus skepticism about legislative utility — are evident in both the BBC and Library of Congress summaries [1] [4].
4. Limitations of the available reporting and where to look next
The documents provided here give clear, citable penalties for Denmark but do not quote the German statute’s penalty table or criminal‑code section that governs post‑2013 prosecutions, only describing the policy shift and its intent [1] [2]. For authoritative, up‑to‑date penalty figures for Germany, examination of the current German Animal Welfare Act (Tierschutzgesetz) and the relevant provisions of the German Criminal Code or official justice ministry announcements would be required; those primary legal texts and government summaries are not included among the supplied sources [1] [2].