– There must be a strict reaction when someone breaks environmental legislation. A company should not be able to remain with the profits of an offence, says First State Attorney Hans Tore Høviskeland, head of the environmental crime unit in Økokrim. Last week, news reported on extensive illegal felling of protected forest. The first state attorney is now calling for stricter penalties for private and public companies in general for environmental crime. – There may be a large fine for the company or a prison sentence for individuals. In addition, you can withdraw the winnings they have had. One can also be sentenced to rectify the illegal intervention, says Høviskeland. Hans Tore Høviskeland in Økokrim believes that the fines must be so high that violations of environmental laws do not “go into the plus” for the company. Photo: Eivind Molde / news Six fines over NOK 100,000 At the request of news, Økokrim has prepared a statistic on criminal actions for illegal interventions in Norwegian protected areas since 1 January 2020. In these almost four years, Økokrim has registered 167 cases with a total of over 2, NOK 5 million in fines. Most of the cases concerned private individuals, and the smallest fine was NOK 3,500. The largest fines are so-called “undertaking penalties”. Six fines were of NOK 100,000 or more. For example, Statkraft and Airlift received fines of NOK 100,000. The largest fine was NOK 250,000. The Norwegian Public Roads Administration received it in January after dumping 1,100 lorry loads of stone within the border of the Nærøyfjorden landscape conservation area in Sogn. This area is on UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Fines for encroachment into Norwegian protected areas Since 1 January 2020, Økokrim has registered 377 cases concerning encroachment into Norwegian protected areas. 135 of the cases were in landscape conservation areas, 129 cases in national parks, 111 cases in nature reserves, and 2 concerned natural monuments. Among the police districts, the most cases were registered in South-East (66), South-West (51) and Agder (49), and the fewest in Møre and Romsdal (6), Troms (12) and Finnmark (12). Altogether, fines of over NOK 2.5 million have been issued in a total of 167 cases since 2020. Six fines were of NOK 100,000 or more. The smallest fine was NOK 3,500. The vast majority of the 167 fines were given as suggestions which were accepted. Two cases still in indictment and verdict, seven cases still in charge and confession verdict, and one case was decided after appeal in the 2nd instance. The statistics from Økokrim apply to the period 1.1.2020-5.10.2023. Want fines that sting – Unfortunately, I see that serious environmental crimes are being committed at regular intervals in, for example, national parks. It is something that must be followed up with severe punishment, says Høviskeland. Lawyer Magnus Engh Juel also argues for fines that sting when companies, municipalities or the state break the Biodiversity Act or other environmental legislation. – It is important that the level of punishment is sufficiently deterrent, he says to news. While he was a police prosecutor in Økokrim, in June 2020 he wrote an article about corporate punishments in the police magazine Miljøkrim. – Environmental crime must cost significantly more than it tastes, says Juel. When Magnus Engh Juel worked in Økokrim, he wrote the article “The price of breaking the law”, about increasing the level of fines for companies. Photo: Bård Siem / news A central question is how large a fine should be in relation to the finances of the offender. Straffelova says that the assessment of punishment for undertakings must, among other things, take into account the financial ability of the offender. Penalty Act on corporate penalties Section 28. Aspects of the decision on whether a company is to be punished When deciding whether a company is to be punished according to Section 27, and when measuring the punishment, account must be taken, among other things, of a. the preventive effect of the punishment, b. the seriousness of the offence, and whether someone acting on behalf of the company has proven guilty, c. whether the company could have prevented the offense through guidelines, instructions, training, control or other measures, d. whether the offense was committed to promote the company’s interests, e. whether the company has had or could have obtained any benefit from the offence, f. the company’s financial capacity, g. whether other reactions as a result of the offense are imposed on the company or someone who has acted on its behalf, including whether any individual is punished, and h .if an agreement with a foreign state presupposes the use of corporate penalties. “0.006 per thousand” in fines The statistics for Økokrim show that a typical fine for private persons in such cases is often NOK 12,000. This corresponds to approximately 2 percent of an average annual salary in Norway. By way of comparison, NOK 250,000 in fines for the National Roads Administration is 0.006 per cent of their annual budget of NOK 41.2 billion. – What does the fine say the Swedish Road Administration got about the general level of fines for companies? – That says something, but at the same time each individual case must be considered. How serious the intervention is, how much debt those involved have, and the financial ability of the company, says Høviskeland. – Is the fine level a sufficient deterrent? – I think it has gotten better. They are sentenced to stricter penalties now than just a few years ago. But serious offenses are still being committed. This may indicate that the level of punishment is still too low. Norwegian Road Administration: – No comment Development director Kjell Inge Davik in the Norwegian Road Administration is not happy about the violation of the law with the stone filling in the Nærøyfjorden landscape conservation area. – It is deeply regrettable and something that should not happen. Fortunately, it happens very rarely. We received a corporate penalty which we of course accepted, he says. Davik will not comment on whether the level of corporate penalties is a deterrent. – Is NOK 250,000 enough for the Road Administration? – All money can give more money to the road, so we don’t want this to happen. But I have no comment on the level itself, says Davik. Development director Kjell Inge Davik in the Norwegian Road Administration accepted the fine of NOK 250,000. Photo: Jon Bolstad / news Law violations can be profitable Jurist Juel points out that companies are “rational”, in the sense that they do what is profitable. He fears that low fines can make breaking the law profitable. – Then you can roughly calculate that there will only be a negligible cost in the account and that the profit will be greater than the fine, he says. In corruption cases, Økokrim has sometimes given high fines, in the multi-million range. – Up to NOK 300 million in the Yara case is probably a record when it comes to corporate penalties. The type of really high corporate fines I have to see for breaches of environmental legislation or environmental crime in the Norwegian context, says Juel. – Are fines of 100,000 to Statkraft and 250,000 to the National Roads Administration a deterrent? – The numbers are modest compared to the financial situation of the company. Few who complain about the fine In addition to the level of the fine, the statistics from Økokrim also show that almost all the fines were approved, and only a handful went to the courts. – Is it a symptom that the fines are perceived as low? – The fact that so few cases go to court can be read as an indication of that, yes, says Juel.
ttn-69
Ecocrime leader believes the level of punishment for environmental crime is low – news Vestland
