Police officers must tolerate being pointed at, says pensioner Terje Søderholm. He was sheriff in Loppa in Western Finnmark until 2003. The background is that the wadsøværinger Victor Halstensen was this week sentenced to pay a fine of NOK 4,800 after pointing the finger at the police several times. Former police officer Søderholm has been in similar situations many times. – If you are determined, friendly and self-confident, this will go just fine. Youth is youth. Someone who may have had one too many beers can still be talked to. He regrets it anyway the next day, he says. – Such things should be overlooked Søderholm fears such reports weaken the authority of the police, as is sought to be achieved by prosecuting insolence. – You do not gain trust by submitting such reviews. Such things should be overlooked. I have done it myself thousands of times, says Søderholm. Hild Rønning, associate professor at the Police Academy in Bodø, is also concerned that this type of prosecution weakens trust in the police. Associate professor Hild Rønning teaches at the Norwegian Police Academy. She advises the students not to make themselves vulnerable. – It’s no use demanding trust. It is something you deserve, she says. – No comment news has asked a number of bodies to comment on this case: Finnmark police district Ministry of Justice Police Directorate The Police Union The police officer who reported Victor Halstensen The judge in Indre- and East-Finnmark district court None of them wants to be interviewed and answer how much police officers on duty have to accept of rude comments. Must tolerate people expressing themselves Hild Rønning has taught at the Norwegian Police Academy for over twenty years. The criminal case against the 18-year-old in Vadsø may seem trivial, she believes, and borderline what can be considered a criminal offence. – In teaching, I advise students not to make themselves so vulnerable. They exercise authority by virtue of their role. Then they have to tolerate people speaking out against the police without taking it personally, says Rønning. When the Freedom of Expression Commission presented its report last autumn, they questioned whether the practice the police and courts have adopted is too strict. Kjersti Løken Stavrum and Culture Minister Anette Trettebergstuen pictured in connection with the report to the Freedom of Expression Commission being handed in during Arendal Week. Photo: Hans Erik Weiby / news Associate Professor of Jurisprudence Katrine Holter believes the Storting must look into the matter. She also works at the Norwegian Police Academy. – As the Freedom of Expression Commission pointed out, the courts have set the threshold strangely low for ruling in such cases, and there are good reasons why the legislature should raise this threshold, says Holter. One finger is legal in the USA In American law, it has been established several times that pointing the finger is protected by freedom of speech. The Sixth Court of Appeal – one of 13, subject only to the Supreme Court – dealt with such a case in 2019, where a woman pointed the finger at the police after being stopped at a traffic control. The New York Times also cites two other such decisions, stating: “So it’s confirmed: Pointing the finger at a police officer is protected by the First Amendment.” The constitutional supplement, “the first amendment”, states that no laws must conflict with freedom of expression. Holter says it is the same arguments that apply in the discussion in Norway. Associate professor Katrine Holter believes the courts have too low a threshold for imposing punishment in cases of harassment of police officers. – Pointing the finger at the police is not a particularly elegant statement, but it can still be interpreted as criticism of the authorities. Punishing such statements critical of power has a slightly authoritarian feel which I believe is not appropriate in a state of law, says Holter. And the Norwegian Supreme Court has dealt with this question. In 1985 it was ruled that pointing the finger “does not constitute an ‘assault’ by the police”. Two law professors have criticized the judgment from Indre- and Øst-Finnmark district court, because the decision in the Supreme Court is not referred to. No way back after warning According to the verdict from Vadsø, Victor Halstensen has several times pointed the finger at two police officers, who were in the police car when they were patrolling a Russian party late at night. One of them got out of the car and contacted the 18-year-old. The police officer advised that he would be reported if this happened again. Victor Halstensen will appeal the judgment from the District Court to the Court of Appeal. Photo: Elias Høyen Half an hour later, Halstensen was on his way home. In the judgment, it is stated that he “looked over his shoulder with his gaze towards the patrol, and then pointed his fingers at the police while holding his hand behind his back.” Halstensen had already received a warning that he would be reported; now there was no going back. The court states in the judgment that “he must have understood or at least considered it certain or most likely that he molested the police by showing them the finger”. Vadsøværingen has decided to appeal the judgment to the Court of Appeal. Different practices from place to place Associate Professor Hild Rønning notes that there can be differences in how the police deal with rudeness from place of service to place of service. – I recently had an assignment with the students, where they had to discuss where the limit is for what the police must tolerate from people’s statements. One of the students had been to a place of service where they were told to have a low tolerance for, among other things, being shown the finger. There it was seen as a violation of the police’s authority. Other students have experienced that you have to put up with this, says Rønning. She believes that maintaining authority is not in itself a basis for exercising authority. From the research team, you see different practices from place to place. Photo: Kyrre Lien / NTB – Of course it is important that people have respect for the police, but in order to intervene with people and decide over them, the police must have a basis in the law. You can say that it is part of the professional risk of police officers to be challenged on their authority, as you as a police officer have a duty to act with calmness and restraint, and not to be provoked by resistance or insults, says Rønning. – Hinside’s reaction Police veteran Terje Søderholm from Finnmark himself thinks that the youth these days are better than before. Terje Søderholm had worked for 38 years in the police when he left in 2003. He was then a sheriff in Loppa in Vest-Finnmark. Photo: Idar J. Mecklenburg – Youth is no worse now than twenty years ago. There is not as much drinking and drugs as there used to be, says Søderholm. He emphasizes that it is not every day that people make rude comments, at least not when he was working in the police. – The way the police have reacted in this case is beyond belief. You cannot allow yourself to be destroyed psychologically by a young person who says ugly things or points the finger. A finger in the air means nothing, says Søderholm.
ttn-69
Police veteran believes the police must tolerate being pointed at – news Troms and Finnmark
