Revelations about a number of individual politicians have caused them to lose the trust of the Norwegian people. Now we are also threatened that the political system itself chooses to turn a blind eye to offences. Disclaimers and lack of action risk undermining the rule of law. We cannot replace that as easily as ministers who have taken advantage of commuter accommodation or breached eligibility rules. The two-year marking of the Supreme Court verdict on Fosen has given rise to new demonstrations and calls. The Supreme Court completed its mission, which was to answer a question about whether the Sami’s right to practice culture had been violated according to the UN Convention on Civil and Political Rights (SP). A unanimous judgment from the Supreme Court established this. In this way, the Supreme Court helps to preserve the legitimacy of the legal community by performing its social role. The fact that the government chooses to do nothing, two years after the verdict was handed down, helps to undermine it. It is the case that in cases where the state commits legal errors, it is the state that must correct the errors that have been made. The Norwegian Institution for Human Rights (NIM) criticizes that the judgment has not been followed up, and warns that this could create a new violation of human rights: SP Article 2 implies that you have the right to effective remedies if a human right has been violated. This has not happened. The Fosen case comes at a time when trust in Norwegian politicians is already hanging in the balance. Revelations about travel bills, commuter accommodation, sunglasses theft, competence and possible insider trading make Norwegian politicians seem irresponsible and lawless. Or possibly worst of all, that they do not take seriously the social responsibility we have elected them for and shown them trust in. Distrust of individual politicians is one thing, but the Fosen case threatens something far greater: the institutional framework that is supposed to preserve the rule of law. The legitimacy of the legal society depends on both the institutions and the people who represent them acting morally and with integrity. It is easy to point out that this or that politician lacks integrity or that human rights violations carried out by the state are morally reprehensible. But what we are seeing now, the threat of a breach of SP article 2, symbolizes something more sinister with the legal society. That we live in a state where the authorities do not take our most basic rights seriously, and that the legitimate institutions we have, such as the Supreme Court, are paralyzed by a government paralyzed. It is not the Supreme Court, but the government and the state administration that weakens the legitimacy we have for the legal society. Disclaimer has not only been a problem after the verdict, it was also a problem long before. It was already pointed out in 2018 by the UN that the development of wind turbines at Fosen should be stopped until the case had run its course through the legal system. No one chose to deal with this either. The government continued to play along with the business industry. In fact, data from the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers show that Norway takes an average of 964 days to comply with judgments from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). This is more than 100 days longer than other countries with which we like to compare ourselves, Sweden (682 days) and Denmark (788 days). With the Fosen case, and now the risk of a breach of SP article 2, we cannot say that the authorities have a drive to change this picture, but instead allow an undermining of the legal society.
ttn-69
Trust in politicians hangs in the balance – Statement
