– The police should only look away if someone points the finger at them, says Olav Torvund, professor of law at the University of Oslo. – He has been sentenced contrary to what the Supreme Court has said. It is completely unacceptable to simply pretend that the Supreme Court judgment does not exist, says Hans Fredrik Marthinussen, professor of law at the University of Bergen. Russefest Victor Halstensen was at a Russefest in Vadsø on the night of Sunday 8 May when he expressed his dissatisfaction with the police. The 18-year-old himself admits that he pointed the finger several times. A police officer made contact and warned that he would be reported if it happened again. A little later he was on his way away from the scene. According to the police officer, he once again pointed his finger behind his back. Halstensen himself denies it. He believes the officer misunderstood, and that he probably only straightened the clothes a little. He was not believed in that. Inner and Eastern Finnmark has now sentenced him to a fine of NOK 4,800. Breaking with the Supreme Court Law professor Hans Fredrik Marthinussen commented on the case on Twitter when the newspaper iFinnmark discussed the trial. He was critical of the police reporting Halstensen, and referred to a judgment handed down by the Supreme Court in 1985. There they state that pointing the finger at the police is not a criminal offense in itself. Marthinussen has now read the recent judgment at the request of news, and reacts to the fact that the district court does not even mention the judgment from the Supreme Court. Professor Hans Fredrik Marthinussen believes the district court is making a serious mistake by ignoring what the Supreme Court has said. Photo: UiB – When the Supreme Court has ruled on such a case, lower courts must accept it and use it as a basis – unless they believe that things have changed significantly, or that there are other things the Supreme Court has overlooked, says Marthinussen. In other words: the court must justify that this case differs from the case where the Supreme Court said that the middle finger could not be punished. Halstensen had no right to a defense attorney, since it was basically just a motion. As a school student, he also could not afford to pay out of his own pocket, he tells news. – This is a typical example of running over someone who does not have the resources to defend themselves properly, says Marthinussen. Not a criminal case – Why do you, as a law professor, choose to get involved in a rather small and insignificant case of a fine of less than NOK 5,000? – The fact that someone is sentenced in violation of clear Supreme Court practice, and that judgment is not even mentioned by the district court, says something about how easily jurists in Norway – in the court, in the police and the prosecution – obviously take legal rules and legal certainty. It can affect anyone. I don’t think it’s in any way a file case, says Marthinussen. He believes now is a good time for lawyers to do some self-examination after the Tengs case, the Baneheia case, the Nav cases and illegal searches of drug users – some of them in violation of the torture provision in the human rights convention. Freedom of expression Law professor Olav Torvund is also critical of the police’s decision to open a case. He believes that the section in question in the Criminal Code must be softened. – My assessment is that the police have become far too lenient, and that this provision is practiced too strictly. This judgment is an example of that, says Torvund. Section 156 of the Criminal Code Section 156. Obstructing a public official Anyone who prevents a public official from performing an act of service, for example by refusing access to places where he has legitimate access, is punished with a fine or imprisonment for up to 6 months. Anyone who insults a public official during or because of the performance of the service by insulting words or other inappropriate behavior is punished with a fine. Torvund agrees with the Freedom of Expression Commission, which wants to raise the threshold for what is punishable by saying to the police. – The police have become far too sensitive. This judgment is an example of that, says Torvund. Photo: Christian Ziegler Remme / news “Words such as ‘bullshit’, ‘damn idiot’ and ‘cabbage worm’ are recent examples of expressions that have been punished when they are directed at the police”, writes the commission. The Supreme Court has said that police officers must be able to withstand provocations on the job, says Torvund. – It is part of the police’s professionalism that they must endure more insults than what others have to endure. It is part of their job when they meet people in crisis, in confrontations and so on. The police should just look away if someone points the finger at them. Now the provision is practiced so that the police have to put up with less than people who cannot be expected to be trained to put up with such things. Would like to appeal Victor Halstensen is adamant that he did not point the finger again, and believes the case is a trifle. – Most people who raise their finger don’t mean it as a hello or hello, but here in Finnmark it doesn’t mean much. Nobody cares, he says to news. He has the impression that the police have been out to catch him after previous episodes of what he calls “small illegal driving on a moped and things like that”. Now he wants to appeal the sentence, but doesn’t know if he can get advice. According to Halstensen, the prosecutor brought up the Supreme Court judgment in court, but said that it was no longer relevant, because the law had changed. Professor Marthinussen says that the section has been moved from the old vagrancy law and into the Criminal Code, but that it was never intended to change the content. He believes Halstensen should file an appeal and show what the Supreme Court has said. Although the Court of Appeal will most often reject small cases, he believes that the application of the law is so wrong that it is natural to send the case back to the district court.
ttn-69
Was fined for pointing the finger at the police – law professor asks him to appeal – news Troms and Finnmark
