– Takako is so old that it is unreasonable to throw her out of the country. Her age makes the decision extra special, says Marius Storvik, associate professor of jurisprudence at Norway’s Arctic University (UiT). At the same time, age is part of the reason for the decision, as he sees the matter. Takako Ellefsen is not granted residence in Norway by the Norwegian Immigration Service because she does not have sufficient health insurance. At the same time, according to the family, it is difficult to obtain comprehensive health insurance in Norway due to her age. The Takako case Takako Ellefsen was married to a Norwegian man for 46 years until he died in 2009. On 4 January 2021, Takako Ellefsen applied to the UDI for a so-called residence card as a family member of an EEA citizen, i.e. the daughter. On 26 November 2021, UDI rejected the application. Ellefsen complained about the refusal, and the Board of Immigration (UNE) was to assess the complaint. On Monday 5 December, the final refusal came from UNE, and the refusal is summarized as follows: She does not have the right of residence in Norway as a family member of an EEA citizen. She does not have a residence permit on any other basis. There is no basis for granting her a permit under Section 38 of the Immigration Act. She is not protected against returning to Japan. – Problematic According to Storvik, it is natural that health insurance comes with limitations. Because health costs increase for the elderly, and health insurance will become unreasonably expensive. He believes the problem arises when you make a demand for health insurance that is impossible to obtain. – Then it appears that she is being refused residence because of her age. That her age is the real underlying relationship. If that is true, it is a very special case, and that also makes it very problematic, he says. Marius Storvik, associate professor of jurisprudence at the Arctic University of Norway (UiT). Photo: private The Equality and Discrimination Act states that people must not be treated differently on the basis of age. Discrimination can be lawful if it has a factual purpose, is necessary to achieve the purpose and is not disproportionately intrusive towards the person who is treated differently. – Here it looks like she is being directly affected on the basis of her age. Rules have been made that are not adapted to cases like this, says Storvik. He points out that the authorities have the burden of proof that discrimination has not occurred, and is unsure whether it can be proven. – If it is discriminatory, it will be against the constitution to deport her from the country. I don’t know if that applies here, but I would try it if I were a party to the case. Have to shell out 30-40,000 a month for health insurance Lawyer Alexander Nyheim Jenssen now represents Takako. He is of the same opinion as Storvik. – The conditions set for insurance are impossible to fulfill. Then she has to pay NOK 30-40,000 a month. It’s not something you can impose on someone, and it’s not something anyone can achieve financially, says Nyheim Jenssen. During the next few days, he will work on the possibility of submitting a new application for a residence permit, in addition to an application for a temporary injunction. He says they will also argue with Takako’s connection to Norway, that all her children are Norwegian citizens and that her daughter lives in Norway with her. Klara Johanne Ellefsen has bought an apartment for herself and her mother in Stavanger. Now she may have to move to Japan. Photo: Thomas Ystrøm / news Going to court if necessary A request will also be sent to the immigration authorities to look at the case again, says the lawyer. He says they will also look at whether they can proceed to the legal system. – It is never necessarily easy to get through when the administration has had a hearing in two instances, and has made a final decision, he says and adds: – But here we believe that there are several key elements and conditions that have not been mentioned or taken into account in the decision. We therefore believe that there are good opportunities to ensure that she can remain in Norway. Among other things, he points to the financial and health challenges of commuting between Japan and Norway. It would become a reality for Ellefsen if she is not allowed to stay in Norway. Takako Ellefsen’s last wish is to live in Norway for the rest of her life, before she is buried in Stavanger with her husband of 46 years. Photo: Thomas Ystrøm / news Can adapt individual cases The Takako case reminds Marius Storvik at UiT of the Maria Amelie case. In 2011, Amelie came forward as an undocumented refugee. After this, she became a media favorite and was named Norwegian of the year. But the rules said she had to be thrown out of the country. In the end, an adjustment was made to the regulations which meant that the type of undocumented immigrants with a special work connection to the country could be granted residence in Norway. – That exception does not apply here, but it shows that the politicians were able to make an adjustment when the matter is brought to the fore, he says. The Minister of Justice does not intervene After the relationship with Takako became known, several people have become involved in the case. Among them a number of parliamentarians from several parties. Tobias Drevland Lund (R) and Grete Wold (SV) sent a written question to Minister of Justice Emilie Enger Mehl about the case. They wanted an answer to a clarification in the legislation. On Tuesday, VG writes that Enger Mehl is not involved in the case. The Ministry of Justice and Emergency Preparedness writes, among other things, that they do not have the authority to intervene in or influence the outcome of individual cases under the Immigration Act. They refer to UNE’s justification for the refusal Ellefsen has received. The case has also engaged social media. – The commitment is very important, and it is of course something we will continue to show, says lawyer Nyheim Jenssen. He believes the commitment is a strong signal that the decision is perceived as unreasonable. – There is a consistent reaction to the decision, where virtually everyone agrees that this is unreasonable. That is a strong signal that the decision that has been made should not stand, he says. Ellefsen has had his application for a residence card rejected, and cannot appeal. Now she must leave Norway by 28 December. Photo: Thomas Ystrøm / news
ttn-69
Researcher believes the decision to throw Takako (83) out of the country may be age discriminatory – news Rogaland – Local news, TV and radio
