Cannabis-convicted woman lost in Supreme Court – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country

The woman in her 40s said in court that she uses medication with cannabis in it. She must have taken this more than eight hours before she drove. The woman claimed she was clinically sober behind the wheel. After being convicted both in the district court and the court of appeal, she had the case tried in the Supreme Court. It did not lead. – The Supreme Court notes that regular users of cannabis can be convicted of driving under the influence without having been under the influence. It is a result many will have difficulty accepting, says lawyer Frode Sulland to news. Compared to the alcohol limit The woman appeared in the Supreme Court in November. She was accused of driving with THC, which is an intoxicating active substance in cannabis products, in her blood. When the amount of THC in her blood was recalculated as the limits are set in the law, it was found that she had a blood alcohol level of over 0.2. In the Supreme Court, she and the lawyer stated that the limit is so low that one can be convicted without having been under the influence of drugs. Believes the limit is up to the legislator, the Supreme Court says they cannot decide whether the limit is too low. They believe this is up to the Storting (in the form of law) or the government (in the form of regulations) to determine. “The Supreme Court assumed that the wording of the law does not limit where the limit can be set. Based on the preparatory work, it was a consideration to avoid hitting small residual concentrations that no longer have an impact, but the primary aim was to hit all cases that could have an impact. The limit that has been set is therefore within the guidelines that the preparatory work expresses.” They write that the limit is based on a professional and political judgment that the courts cannot review. “Whether the limit should be set higher, so that it does not or to a lesser extent affects residual concentrations that have not affected the ability to drive, but so that at the same time it affects fewer people who may have been affected, is up to the regulator or legislator to assess,” writes the Supreme Court. The decision clarifies that the regulatory limit for THC in the blood is valid, they conclude.



ttn-69