Was it sufficient that a general majority of the representatives of the Storting said yes to the third energy market package when Norway became part of the Acer collaboration in 2018? Or was the transfer of power so extensive that the rule in the Constitution regarding a qualified majority should be invoked? That is the question that the highest judges in the country decided on today. The court concluded: The transfer of sovereignty to Acer is no more “intrusive” than that a simple majority in the Storting was sufficient to make a valid decision. – We are in the border zone of what can be characterized as a transfer of authority, and this is limited. I assess in the same way as the Storting, said Supreme Court judge Knut Erik Sæther. He added that “all in all, I have no doubt that the transfer of authority is not intrusive”. No to the EU has thus lost in three courts. Previously, Oslo District Court and Borgarting Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the state. Read the Supreme Court’s reasoning: The Supreme Court determines that ACER/ESA cannot decide whether to build new foreign cables, or prohibit restrictions on the export of power. Nor can ACER/ESA set electricity prices. No to the EU agrees with this. However, the organization has argued that decisions from ACER/ESA can indirectly affect electricity prices. The Supreme Court believes that such an effect can only be marginal in light of what follows anyway from the fact that the foreign cables exist and are part of the European power market, of which Norway is a part anyway. Electricity prices are a function of a number of factors, such as transmission capacity, weather conditions and the price of other energy. The conclusion is that even though the Storting decision in 2018 transferred authority in an important area of society – the energy sector – international bodies were not given the authority to make decisions of great societal importance in Norway. The Supreme Court therefore comes to the conclusion that the transfer of authority is not intrusive, and that the Storting did not break the Constitution in 2018. The weight of the case meant that the Supreme Court fielded as many as 17 out of 20 judges. The verdict can put an end to a year-long legal dispute. Photo: Gorm Kallestad / NTB – Take note of the judgment No to the EU was quick to comment on the judgment. – We note that the state has won on the legal issue we raised the case on. But we think it was important and right to raise such a matter of principle, says Einar Frogner, leader of No to the EU. In a press release, the organization writes that they are now ending the legal process against Norwegian participation in the energy union, but that they are continuing the political fight. The organization also does not rule out legal action later “if the EU adaptation becomes more and more invasive.” – We are and will continue to be a watchdog for the Constitution and for the people’s government. The fight for sovereignty, solidarity and popular government is as important today as it was in 1994, and a broad majority of the people agree with us. Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre (Ap): “I am happy that the Supreme Court has confirmed that the Storting used the right procedure when they decided to incorporate the third energy package in 2018 with a simple majority. We have had a good and thorough legal process, which ended with the Supreme Court hearing the case in plenary session. It is useful that we have now received the principled clarifications that come in this comprehensive judgement. It is good that we have received the Supreme Court’s clarification in a case that has been disputed for many years, both legally and politically. This process has shown the Norwegian rule of law at its best.” Høgre comments on the judgment as follows: – This is a crushing judgment, which confirms that No to the EU’s presentation of Acer’s importance for energy policy and electricity prices in Norway is completely wrong. The judgment in the Supreme Court put an end to a long-running debate about Acer. The transfer of authority is limited, and the Storting’s decision is valid, says Nikolai Astrup. Raudt is disappointed, after the verdict was announced: – I think many people are disappointed today and had hoped the Supreme Court would put down the transfer of authority to ACER. But the verdict shows us that it is a political responsibility to put the foot down for power liberalism. Only the Storting can do that, says Sofie Marhaug, 2nd deputy chair of the Energy and Environment Committee. Gro-Anita Mykjåland, energy policy spokesperson for the Center Party: “SP thinks it is good that No to the EU has taken on the legal battle over Norwegian renunciation of sovereignty. Then there is a difference between a legal assessment that relates to the legislation and a political assessment that must ensure legitimacy in the population. We note that No to the EU has not succeeded in the legal assessment of the EU’s third energy market package. The Center Party stands firm on the position we have always had that Norway should not become part of the EU’s common energy market.” The left believes that the verdict must have consequences: – Now the Supreme Court has put an end to conspiracy theories once and for all. No, ACER does not control Norwegian electricity prices. No, ACER imposes on us no wind power development or overseas cables. It hardly makes an impression on the strongest conspirators, but I hope at least serious actors stop repeating their claims after this unanimous Supreme Court verdict, says deputy leader Sveinung Rotevatn. Read more reactions here Bård Standal, deputy director, Fornybar Norge: “This judgment shows that much of the discussion about Acer is based on misleading and conspiracy theories. The Supreme Court not only states that the transfer of authority is not intrusive, but that it is actually at the extremes of what can even be called a transfer of authority.” “Energy policy in Norway is decided by Norwegian politicians. The Supreme Court is clear that it is Norwegian politics and the market, not Acer, that determine electricity prices in Norway. It is a myth that Acer is important for Norwegian electricity prices, says Standal.” Process in several instances Behind the question of “constitutionality” lay deeper questions about electricity prices, “heirloom silver”, jobs and national sovereignty. At the top, the case raises questions about the principle of separation of powers and the role of the Supreme Court. The courts must control the people elected, but not over-examine them. That balance can be very delicate. “In my opinion, it goes against the rule of law if the courts should not under any circumstances be able to test whether a political majority stays within the limits of the Constitution in an area like this”, stated the Supreme Court when it agreed to hear the case in 2021. Legally, No to the EU argued along several axes: Firstly, they claim that the Storting majority was wrong when it assumed that Acer’s power is limited to situations where the states are not in agreement. Furthermore, they argue that the effect of relinquishing sovereignty to international organizations must be based on the total sum – not each individual transfer. As part of the EEA agreement, Norway has introduced many thousands of European legal acts. In only two of the cases has the Constitution’s provision for a three-quarters majority come into play. The first time was the registration itself in the EEA; the second time was when Norway introduced the EU’s regulation of the financial markets. Facts about Acer *Acer stands for Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators – the agency for cooperation between regulatory authorities. * Acer is part of the energy cooperation in the EU. ACER must ensure a level playing field and that the different countries’ regulatory authorities (in Norway it is NVE) work together. * Acer must ensure that European countries comply with the rules for power exchange in Europe. The agency must interpret the regulations and create guidelines for the power markets. * The EU’s third energy market package is a bundle of legal acts from 2009 which further develops the internal market for energy. Norway joined the package in a vote in the Storting in 2018. * No to the EU taking legal action against the state following the decision in the Storting. The dispute is over whether the Storting should only cede sovereignty to the EU with a simple majority, or whether a three-quarters majority was needed. * No to the EU lost the case in the Oslo District Court and in the Borgarting Court of Appeal. * On 5 September, the case was taken up in the Supreme Court in plenary session. (Source: NTB) The stated and overarching goal of the plaintiff No to the EU has been to “take back political control by force, without the EU-controlled market regime that has given us a power price crisis”. Photo: Ole Berg-Rusten / NTB Støre: – Regulated trade cooperation is very important To the extent that the dispute over the third energy market package is over, the battle over the fourth Acer package has only just begun. The Labor Party is basically positive about the package, while party leader in the Center Party, Trygve Slagsvold Vedum, has said that it is out of the question to sit in a government that introduces it. This is how Norway has become more closely connected to Europe with power cables.Norway is part of a power market that is connected to Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Germany, Poland, Russia, the Netherlands and the Baltic countries with cables. The aim is to even out price differences and to strengthen energy security. A high-voltage power line transmits power from Sør-Trøndelag to Jämtland in Sweden for the first time. Since then, several lines have been built to Sweden and Finland. The submarine cables Skagerrak 1 and 2 were installed in the summer of 1976 and 1977. The transmission capacity was 500 megawatts. Since then, Norway has received two new cables to Denmark in 1993 and 2014. The power market was opened up with the Energy Act. Prices for power were to be governed by supply and demand. Sweden and Norway formed a joint power exchange, which Finland and Denmark later joined. The Nordned cable between Norway and the Netherlands will open in April 2008. The capacity is 700 megawatts. The fourth cable, Skagerrak 4, opened between Kristiansand and Tjele in Denmark at the turn of the year. Then the transmission capacity between the countries increased from 1,000 to 1,700 megawatts. The Solberg government decides to build a cable to Germany and Great Britain, each of 1400 megawatts. In December, trial operation of Nordlink, which runs between southern Norway and Germany, began. Since March 2021, the cable has been in normal operation. The capacity is 1400 megawatts. The cable between Suldal in Rogaland and Newcastle in the UK opened in October 2021. The transmission capacity is 1400 megawatts. Show more Last year SP put forward a proposal in the Storting to “start the process of withdrawing Norway from the EU’s energy agency (Acer)”. – Norway is a small, open economy. And as a major exporter of gas, it is important for Norway to have orderly market conditions and equal terms of competition, said Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre when he addressed the Confederation’s national meeting last week. He then received a response to accusations from the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions, which decided that Norway must break with European energy cooperation and stop “talking to Brussels”. – The large foreign cables to England and Germany are the triggering reason for the decision to withdraw from Acer, explained Federation leader Jørn Eggum. – As a major exporter of gas, it is important for Norway to have orderly market conditions and equal conditions of competition, said Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre when he addressed the Confederation’s national meeting last week.
ttn-69
No to the EU also lost the Acer case in the Supreme Court – news Vestland
