The plaintiffs put forward the following demands: A higher compensation after a prison sentence as a result of judicial murder. Compensation according to the Damages Compensation Act. Here, it must be demonstrated that individuals or a few people have acted grossly negligently or with intent. Reparation after human rights violations. Two out of three plaintiffs were upheld by the district court on the first of these three points. But they were not satisfied with the sum. On Tuesday, a judgment was handed down in the Borgarting Court of Appeal, where the court believes that the two plaintiffs are not entitled to more compensation. FORNOYD: – There is no doubt that the malpractice was serious, and the state has been keen to clean it up ever since the legal application error became known. At the same time, it has been central to the state that the settlement must be in line with current law, says David Magnus Myr. Photo: VIGDIS HELLA / news – The Court of Appeal did not find that the ECHR or the EEA Agreement gave the private parties the right to more compensation than what two of them had been paid in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Act’s rules on compensation for unjustified criminal prosecution, the Borgarting Court of Appeal writes in a press release . The court rejects the appeal from the district court and acquits the state. They are also not awarded legal costs for the Court of Appeal. – The judgment confirms the sober level we have in Norway for the payment of compensation, also where the state has made serious mistakes, says David Magnus Myr, who is a lawyer at the Government Attorney. Considering an appeal to the Supreme Court – It is positive that the Court of Appeal has established that all the appellants, i.e. the state, have violated their human rights. And then we note that there was dissent linked to the question of measuring compensation. So says Roy Arteid, lawyer for the three victims. HIGH COURT: Roy Arteid is the lawyer for the three victims. He says they are considering whether to appeal to the Supreme Court. Photo: Morten Andersen / news The Court of Appeal’s majority of four judges came to the conclusion that they are not entitled to more compensation than this according to the Criminal Procedure Act’s rules on compensation for unfair criminal prosecution. A minority of one co-judge concluded that the compensation should be set at NOK 900,000 and NOK 1 million respectively, according to the Borgarting Court of Appeal. – For the time being, we are taking the judgment into account. And will then use the time in the future to consider questions about appealing to the Supreme Court, says Arteid. Both parties appealed In the district court, two victims of the social security scandal were awarded a higher compensation than what the state offered. The state was sentenced to pay Rune Halseth and Marianne Evensen NOK 800,000 more than they had received in compensation. The state gave the two 250,000 and 200,000 each. The District Court therefore believed that the compensation should be one million kroner, but the judges were divided on the question. Both parties appealed the district court judgment. The three Nav victims demanded more compensation and that the state should also be convicted of human rights violations. The state also appealed the decision from the district court. The third Nav victim who has not served time in prison did not receive redress either in the district court or in the court of appeal, according to the judgment from the Borgarting Court of Appeal. The social security scandal was uncovered in 2019 (see facts). Facts about the social security scandal The social security scandal, also known as the Nav scandal, came to light in 2019. 7,510 people have so far been identified as affected by the EEA error, according to NAV. Those affected are affected to varying degrees. Among other things, 86 people were wrongly convicted of social security fraud. 793 people received unjustified repayment claims from NAV. The error was due to the Storting, the courts and the administration misinterpreting the EEA regulations. The case concerned persons who had received sickness benefits, work clearance benefits or care benefits while staying in other countries in the EEA area. NAV made a requirement that recipients of these benefits had to stay on Norwegian soil. This was contrary to the EEA agreement, which states that everyone can move freely within the EEA area. The rules have been interpreted incorrectly since 1994. An investigation committee was set up in November 2019 under the leadership of Professor Finn Arnesen. On 4 August 2020, the investigative committee presented its final report called “Blindzone”. The report showed that there had been a systemic failure in the processing of rules and individual cases. Wrongly sentenced to prison In 2015, Rune Halseth was charged with gross fraud and false testimony. He stayed in Denmark while receiving work clearance money, something he had told Nav about. He was sentenced to five months in prison and had to serve 85 days among murderers before being transferred to serve time with ankle chains. But the verdict was wrong. Norway had a set of regulations that were not in line with the EEA Agreement. – I have gone through hell. Now it’s over, Halseth told news in connection with the district court case. Published 29/10/2024, at 17.01 Updated 29.10.2024, at 19.01
ttn-69
Does not receive higher compensation from the state after the social security scandal – news Norway – Overview of news from various parts of the country
