In the Tengs judgment on Tuesday, the police and the prosecution received harsh criticism from the judges in the Court of Appeal. Words like “speculative” and “confirmation trap” were used. A few hours after the acquittal, Kaare Songstad, police chief in the West police district, issued the following message on Twitter: On Wednesday, he elaborates on his criticism of news. – I simply question whether we have a system with a quality assurance part that is sufficient independently of the investigation itself and the work the police do, says Songstad. He believes that the danger of too close integration between investigators and police lawyers can be that you end up in court with cases where the evidence does not hold up. Today’s organization between police and prosecution The police lawyers are today integrated in the various police districts, with the chief of police as administrative head. The police lawyers can decide to prosecute in many cases. There is this tight link between the police lawyers and the investigators to which police chief Kaare Songstad reacts. The public prosecutor in the relevant district is the overall prosecuting authority for the police prosecutors. The Attorney General in Oslo is the highest prosecuting authority in Norway. In some cases, the public prosecutor, and not the police lawyers, has the final prosecution decision, while the most serious cases go to the public prosecutor. Songstad does not call for completely watertight bulkheads. He still wants lawyers to ensure quality and manage the police’s work in the investigation phase. Police chief Kaare Songstad is tired of what he believes to be a “long series of serious cases” where the police and prosecutors have received criticism afterwards. Now he is calling for reorganization. Photo: Jan Børge Leirvik / news – But the most important decisions that concern the final control of the product the police bring, i.e. assessing whether to press charges and go to court with the most serious cases, should be decided by an authority that is not has something to do with the police, he believes. The chief of police believes that such a system can help reverse what he believes to be a bad development in recent years, where the police and the prosecutor’s office, in his opinion, have “received quite strong criticism for the work that has been done in a large number of serious cases”. – Should be investigated, think justice politicians Politicians in the justice committee at the Storting support Songstad’s plan. – It is time for a debate about whether we should make a clearer distinction, and how it can be arranged, says Per-Willy Amundsen (Frp), head of the justice committee. He points out that we in Norway have historically chosen to organize ourselves differently to most other countries in that we do not have a clear distinction between the police and the prosecution. Per-Willy Amundsen (Frp), chairman of the justice committee at the Storting. Photo: Terje Pedersen / NTB – Today’s organization has advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, it is important that a possible future prosecution reform is based on a thorough investigation, he emphasizes. Sveinung Stensland (H), deputy chairman of the justice committee, also believes that the topic is overripe. – This court case and other court cases emphasize that we must have the discussion. He points out that the organization has been discussed internally in the Conservative Party. – I want to praise Songstad for being so clear. He is an important voice. But changes mean a long process anyway. Not only can changes be made to the budget, but must also be followed up through instructions, laws and regulations. – Refreshing Judge Rune Bård Hansen at the Agder Court of Appeal is a member of the judges’ media group. He finds it refreshing and legitimate that a police chief comes out with something he genuinely believes. – In my view, it is too rare for subject experts to do this, says Hansen. He emphasizes that many decisions in the investigation require prosecutorial expertise, such as arrest, search and seizure. He then believes it is an advantage that the police lawyers are closely linked to the investigation and participate in meetings. – But yes, it probably often happens that the contact between the professional police investigation and the police lawyers becomes too close. They live in the same house and are in each other’s hallways. The police must always investigate objectively, but there will soon be a drive to say “we have to clear this up” or “now we have the right perpetrator/woman”, he says. Sverre Bromander, president of the Swedish Lawyers’ Association. Photo: Per Sveinung Larsen / news Sverre Bromander, president of the Norwegian Lawyers’ Association, says it is important that the public prosecutor’s office makes independent decisions regardless of how the agency is organised. – The Lawyers’ Association has long wanted this investigation, and we are happy that Songstad is coming out so clearly. The association has no clear answer as to which solution is the best. This is a big question which, in any case, requires us to get an NOU in place first, he believes. – Has not affected the result Tormod Haugnes is a former public prosecutor in Rogaland. He followed the entire Tengs case from the audience. Haugnes believes that a close link between the police and the prosecution can in certain contexts have unfortunate consequences. He also sees clear advantages in having a prosecuting attorney involved in the investigation of major cases where non-traditional police methods are often required. Former state prosecutor Tormod Haugnes in Rogaland believes that the acquittal in the Tengs case was perfectly fine. Photo: Mathias Oppedal / news – Also as a state prosecutor, I was often close to the police during several cases, but not all my colleagues shared that practice, he says. Haugnes does not see how a clearer distinction that police chief Kaare Songstad calls for could have led to a different result in the Tengs case. – Here we are talking about an investigation that has lasted a long time, and where at one point a DNA trace was obtained that pointed in a specific direction. Then it was absolutely right to align the further investigation to a high degree along that track. Having said that, I believe that the DNA evidence that the prosecution brought to court was not strong enough, and that there was a lack of supporting evidence. In that sense, it was a perfectly reasonable decision by the judges to acquit the defendant, Haugnes believes.
ttn-69
Police chief Kaare Songstad wants to separate the police and the prosecution – gets support – news Rogaland – Local news, TV and radio
