DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Report 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Report 2019 ANNUAL REPORT 2019 DOCUMENT 4:1 (2019–2020) National Preventive Mechanism against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Document 4:1 (2019–2020) The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s Annual Report for 2019 as National Preventive Mechanism against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Submitted to the Storting on 24 March 2020 NORWEGIAN PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN National Preventive Mechanism 4 ANNUAL REPORT 2019 Preface This annual report marks the ffth anniversary of the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM). We hereby present some of our achievements since 2014 and highlight some of the overriding issues we consider to be of importance fve years down the line. This year has been dominated by the work on the Special Report to the Storting on Solitary Confnement and Lack of Human Contact in Norwegian Prisons. In addition, we have carried out visits to twelve institutions where children and adolescents are deprived of their liberty. The Parliamentary Ombudsman's National Contact in Norwegian Prisons was submitted to Preventive Mechanism (NPM) was established the Storting's Standing Committee on Scrutiny and in the spring of 2014. The frst visit was conducted Constitutional Affairs on 18 June 2019. This is the in September of that year. Five years of prevention Parliamentary Ombudsman’s frst Special Report to work, and over 60 visits to different places in the Storting under its prevention mandate. Much of Norway where people might be deprived of their autumn was spent in dialogue with the authorities liberty, have yielded results. Previous annual reports regarding the fndings in the Special Report. have included examples of the results achieved The work on this report to the Storting is presented at places we have visited. In this annual report, in more detail in an article in Chapter three. we dedicate a whole chapter to some of the main results of the prevention work at the national level. This year has also seen the completion of a Although much of our prevention work takes place study into the use of restraint beds in Norwegian in dialogue with the institutions we visit, we want prisons. Being placed in a restraint bed can pose our reports and recommendations to contribute to a considerable risk to both physical and mental improving legal safeguards and protection against health. The European Committee for the Prevention inhuman treatment for those deprived of their liberty of Torture (CPT) has recommended that restraint everywhere in Norway. We have gathered information beds be removed from Norwegian prisons. Restraint about the key results of our work at the national level beds are no longer in use in police custody facilities. in Chapter fve of this report. The Parliamentary Ombudsman has criticised the use of restraint beds in prisons after several visits. Since 2014, the NPM has carried out 20 visits to The Special Report to the Storting also states that 19 of Norway's high-security prisons. The fndings the use of restraint beds constitutes a risk of harm regarding solitary confnement and lack of human to health, and that inmates in restraints risk being contact for inmates have been severe across visits, traumatised during an acute life crisis. The results and the situation appeared to be deteriorating, of a comprehensive compilation that included all despite our recommendations. With this in mind, administrative decisions on the use of restraints we decided in 2019 to use our strongest measure in Norwegian prisons over the past six years are to highlight these issues. The Special Report to the presented in a thematic article in Chapter three of Storting on Solitary Confnement and Lack of Human this annual report. 5 Photo: Mona Ødegård Mona Ødegård Photo: The NPM also used fndings and experiences from Thorough preparation has been key to ensure visits to actively participate in public debate and that the visits were carried out in an appropriate in democratic processes relevant to the prevention manner and that accurate information concerning of torture and other inhuman treatment in Norway. the institutions has been received. We have also In 2019, we made four consultation submissions. followed up visits that were carried out in 2018 The Parliamentary Ombudsman made a consultative through dialogue with the respective institutions. submission in July on the then Ministry of Children This work is described in Chapter fve. and Equality's draft on a new Child Welfare Act. Our comments concerned the proposal to set There has also been a focus on dissemination out further rules for child welfare institutions. in 2019. For the frst time, the NPM hosted an In September, we made another consultation event during the political festival “Arendalsuka”. submission concerning the Directorate of Health's This launched the Special Report to a wider proposal to establish national guidelines for medical audience, with a panel discussion on solitary personnel relating to health services for detainees confnement and lack of human contact in in police custody facilities. In the same month, we Norwegian prisons. There has been a great deal of made a consultation submission on the Ministry of interest in the fndings we presented in the Special Justice and Public Security's proposal to change Report, and it is being used by both the responsible the Execution of Sentences Act’s rules regarding authorities and civil society. Furthermore, we have coercive measures. In December, we made a fourth conducted external activities through meetings with consultation submission in connection with the central government authorities and other parties. proposal for a new law on limiting the use of A solid national dialogue will always be an important coercion in the health and care services. Our work part of the preventive work. on the consultation submissions is the topic of a separate article in Chapter three. Although much of the year has been devoted to a few selected projects, we have carried out twelve visits to places where children and adolescents are Hanne Harlem deprived of their liberty in child welfare and mental Parliamentary Ombudsman health care institutions. Many of the institutions we have visited are small, which meant that we had to develop our methodology for visits. Which sectors are covered by the NPM’s mandate? Approx. 59 127 115 PRISONS AND DETENTION PREMISES POLICE CUSTODY TRANSITIONAL USED BY THE CUSTOMS FACILITIES, INCLUDING HOUSING SERVICE WAITING CELLS 3 9 1 POLICE IMMIGRATION CUSTODY FACILITIES INVOLUNTARY DETENTION CENTRES OF THE NORWEGIAN INSTITUTIONAL ARMED FORCES TREATMENT CENTRE (BRØSET) Approx. 68 70 MENTAL HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS HOUSING FOR PERSONS INSTITUTIONS FOR INVOLUNTARY WITH DEVELOPMENTAL TREATMENT OF PERSONS DISABILITIES WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE ADDICTIONS The number of places where persons with Approx. Approx. developmental disabilities can be deprived of their liberty is uncertain. This is due to a variety of reasons, 1000 150 including that many NURSING HOMES CHILD WELFARE persons with developmental INSTITUTIONS disabilities live in their own home or in sheltered housing facilities. The NPM has yet to carry out visits to this sector and has therefore not finished mapping it. The figures are estimates based on a mapping conducted in 2014/2015, and updated in 2019. 7 Table of Contents Preface 1 › The Parliamentary Ombudsman's Prevention Mandate .............................................. 9 2 › Working Methods ....................................................................................................... 13 3 › Selected topics from 2019 ...............................................................................19 › Use of Restraint Beds in Norwegian Prisons .......................................................... 19 › Special Report on Solitary Confinement in Norwegian Prisons .............................. 32 › Consultation Submissions as Part of the Preventive Work .................................... 38 4 › First Five Years – Some Results ................................................................................ 45 5 › Visits in 2019 ............................................................................................................. 61 › The Child Welfare Service ....................................................................................... 61 › Mental healthcare ................................................................................................... 66 › Recommendations from visits in 2018 ................................................................... 67 6 › National Dialogue ....................................................................................................... 77 7 › International Cooperation .......................................................................................... 81 Statistics ............................................................................................................................ 85 Activities in 2019 ............................................................................................................... 86 Budget and Accounts 2019 ............................................................................................... 90 1 9 The Parliamentary Ombudsman's Prevention Mandate On 14 May 2013, the Storting voted in favour The UN Convention against Torture of Norway ratifying the Optional Protocol to the The UN Convention against Torture states Convention against Torture (OPCAT). The Storting that torture and inhuman treatment are
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Magnus Barefoot from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Magnus Barefoot From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about the second Norwegian king named Magnus Olafsson. For the earlier Norwegian king, see Magnus the Good. Magnus Barefoot Drawing of a coin from the reign of Magnus Barefoot (with confused legend)[1] King of Norway Reign September 1093 – 24 August 1103 Predecessor Olaf III Successor Sigurd I, Eystein I and Olaf Magnusson Co-ruler Haakon Magnusson (until 1095) King of Dublin Reign 1102–1103 Predecessor Domnall Gerrlámhach Successor Domnall Gerrlámhach Born 1073 Norway Died 24 August 1103 (aged 29–30) near River Quoile, Downpatrick Ulster, Ireland Burial near St. Patrick's Church, Downpatrick, Ulster, Ireland Consort Margaret of Sweden Eystein I of Norway Issue Sigurd I of Norway Olaf Magnusson of Norway Ragnild Magnusdotter Tora Magnusdatter Harald IV Gille (claimed) Sigurd Slembe (claimed) Magnus Raude (claimed) Full name Magnús Óláfsson House Hardrada Father Olaf III of Norway Mother Tora?; disputed (see below) Religion Roman Catholicism Magnus Olafsson (Old Norse: Magnús Óláfsson, Norwegian: Magnus Olavsson; 1073 – 24 August 1103), better known as Magnus Barefoot (Old Norse: Magnús berfœttr, Norwegian: Magnus Berrføtt),[2] was King of Norway (as Magnus III) from 1093 until his death in 1103. His reign was marked by aggressive military campaigns and conquest, particularly in the Norse-dominated parts of the British Isles, where he extended his rule to the Kingdom of the Isles and Dublin. His daughter, Ragnhild, was born in 1090. As the only son of King Olaf Kyrre, Magnus was proclaimed king in southeastern Norway shortly after his father's death in 1093. In the north, his claim was contested by his cousin, Haakon Magnusson (son of King Magnus Haraldsson), and the two co-ruled uneasily until Haakon's death in 1095.
    [Show full text]
  • Handskrifter Av Norske Mellomalderlover Ved
    Magnus Rindal Handskrifter av norske mellomalderlover ved Nasjonalbiblioteket NB tema 8 Nasjonalbiblioteket/bokselskap.no Oslo 2020 Magnus Rindal: Handskrifter av norske mellomalderlover ved Nasjonalbiblioteket. NB tema 8, Nasjonalbiblioteket, Oslo 2020 ISBN: 978-82-7965-468-1 (digital, bokselskap.no), 978-82-7965-467-4 (epub), 978-82-7965-469-8 (mobi), 978-82-7965-470-4 (særtrykk) Teksten er lastet ned fra bokselskap.no Forord I 2024 er det 750 år sidan Magnus Lagabøtes landslov kom. Lova er overlevert i 39 handskrifter frå mellomalderen, og nokre få yngre. Dei fleste ligg i samlingar i Danmark og Sverige. Tre av mellomalderhandskriftene ligg i dag i norske samlingar, to ved Nasjonalbiblioteket og eitt ved Gunnerusbiblioteket i Trondheim. To av desse tre har vore i Noreg frå dei blei skrivne. Dei to eldste ligg ved Nasjonalbiblioteket. Eit hovudmål for denne boka er å kaste lys over dei handskriftene av norske mellomalderlover som ligg ved Nasjonalbiblioteket. Hovudvekta vil liggje på handskriftene frå mellomalderen, Ms.4° 1 og Ms.4° 317, som begge inneheld landslova. Dei blir grundig beskrivne, også med omsyn til innhald og språk. Ein del rettarbøter er overleverte i begge desse handskriftene, og for å lette lesinga er opplysningar om innhaldet gjevne to stader. Boka omfattar også dei 25 handskriftene av omsetjing av landslova til dansk, og andre handskrifter av norske lover. Innleiingsvis er det gjeve eit samla oversyn over dei norske lovene frå mellomalderen, som alle finst i avskrifter ved Nasjonalbiblioteket. Her har eg henta stoff også frå Rindal 2004 og Rindal og Spørck 2018, endå om det ikkje er særskilt nemnt.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Norwegian Legal Culture
    Exploring the Norwegian Legal Culture Held at the Faculty of Law at the University in Bergen 25th and 26th August 2011 by Professor Dr. juris Jørn Øyrehagen Sunde 1. An outline of the lectures • A brief introduction to Norwegian state formation from app. 800 till today • A brief introduction to legal culture • Exploring the Norwegian legal culture by using the legal cultural model 2. Norwegian state formation – Middle Ages • Norway as a territory and no state till app. 1200 – The four law territories: Gulating, Frostating, Eidsivating, Borgarting • The emergence of King and Church as state power from app. 900 • The civil wars from 1130 till 1240 • The strong state app. 1250 till 1350 • The union with Sweden from 1319, and with Denmark and Sweden from 1397 2. Norwegian state formation – Early Modern Period • The Black Plague and other plagues from 1350 till 1450 • The reformation in 1536 – Norway a Danish province • The slow recovery of state power from app. 1550 • The absolute kingdom from 1660 – Norway again an independent kingdom – The bureaucratic state 2. Norwegian state formation – Modern Period • The Norwegian Constitution of 1814 – Norway still independent, but now in union with Sweden • Introduction of the parliamentary system in 1884 – the liberal revolution • The Labour party in government from the 1930s and the introduction of the welfare state – the socialist revolution 3. Legal Culture • An analytical tool and not an entity to deduce legal rules from • The increased references to legal culture from the 1990s – The internationalisation of law – The European Council with the ECHR and the European Union with the ECJ • A label on a black hole of knowledge? 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Two EEA Courts’ – a Norwegian Perspective 1
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives ‘The two EEA Courts’ – a Norwegian perspective 1 Dr. Halvard Haukeland Fredriksen, University of Bergen A. Introduction – the notion of ‘EEA Courts’ To most Norwegian lawyers, the term ‘the two EEA Courts’ would probably be understood as a reference to the EFTA Court and the Supreme Court of Norway rather than, as suggested here, to the EFTA Court and ECJ. The understanding of the ECJ as not only an EU but also an EEA Court of Justice has only slowly sunk in to the Norwegian legal community.2 However, not least due to the somewhat troubling prospects to the free movement of capital in the EEA offered by the ECJ’s application of Article 40 EEA in a recent string of cases, 3 appreciation of the ECJ as the gatekeeper for market operators from the EFTA States seeking judicial protec- tion in the EU appears to gain ground: If the ECJ embarks on an interpretation of EEA law which differs from its own interpretation of corresponding provisions of EU law, the result will be gradual undermining of the Agreements overall goal to extend the internal market to include the EFTA States. Thus, the fate of the EEA Agreement at long last hangs on its continued acceptance by the ECJ. Even acknowledging that the ECJ is to be understood as an EEA Court, most Norwegian lawyers would probably argue that this raises the number of EEA Courts to three – the Supreme Court of Norway, the EFTA Court and the ECJ.4 A recent survey of the applica- tion of EEA law in Norwegian courts 1994-2010 has revealed that lower Norwegian courts indeed do appear to see the Supreme Court as an EEA Court proper, taking its decisions into 1 Readers with command of Norwegian should be warned at the outset that this contribution draws heavily upon the more extensive account in the author’s report ‘EU/EØS-rett i norske domstoler’ [EU/EEA law in Norwegian Courts], Report commissioned by the Norwegian EEA Review Committee, Oslo 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe and the Nordic Collective-Bargaining Model the Complex Interaction Between Nordic and European Labour Law Europe and the Nordic Collective-Bargaining Model
    TemaNord 2015:541 TemaNord 2015:541 TemaNord Ved Stranden 18 DK-1061 Copenhagen K www.norden.org Europe and the Nordic Collective-Bargaining Model The Complex Interaction between Nordic and European Labour Law Europe and the Nordic Collective-Bargaining Model One of the special features of the Nordic countries is that the determination of wages and working conditions is largely left up to the negotiations between the social partners. The purpose of this report is to illuminate a number of the challenges faced by the labour-law systems of the Nordic countries in the light of an increasingly well-developed European law system. The first part of the report was prepared by Dr. Jur. Jens Kristiansen, the editor-in-chief, and focuses on a number of the general challenges facing the labour-law systems of the Nordic countries in the form of European rules and court decisions. The second part of the report was prepared by various representatives of employer and employee organisations in the Nordic countries and illustrates some of the challenges faced by the social partners in their interaction with the European court system and the way in which these challenges have been addressed in the individual countries. TemaNord 2015:541 ISBN 978-92-893-4177-6 (PRINT) ISBN 978-92-893-4179-0 (PDF) ISBN 978-92-893-4178-3 (EPUB) ISSN 0908-6692 TN2015541 omslag.indd 1 02-06-2015 11:20:51 Europe and the Nordic Collective-Bargaining Model The Complex Interaction between Nordic and European Labour Law Dr. Jur. Jens Kristiansen (ed.) Contributions by: Jens Kristiansen, Hans Tilly, Lena Maier Söderberg, Flemming Dreesen, Magnús Norðdahl, Christen Horn Johannessen, Hrafnhildur Stefánsdóttir, Gabriella Sebardt, Ane Kristine Lorentzen, Jari Hellsten, Jens Kragh og Ella Sjödin TemaNord 2015:541 Europe and the Nordic Collective-Bargaining Model The Complex Interaction between Nordic and European Labour Law Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Eldre Norske Rettskilder- En Oversikt
    Kjersti Selberg Eldre norske rettskilder en oversikt 3. utgave Juridisk biblioteks skriftserie : 2 skriftserie biblioteks Juridisk Juridisk biblioteks skriftserie : 2 Kjersti Selberg Eldre norske rettskilder en oversikt 3. utgave Juridisk bibliotek Oslo 2013 Eldre norske rettskilder © Universitetsbiblioteket i Oslo. Juridisk bibliotek 2013 ISSN 1893-9686 (online) ISBN 978-82-8037-030-3 (online) Ansvarlig redaktør: Randi Halveg Iversby Forsidebilde: © UiO/Hanne Baadsgaard Utigard 1 Eldre norske rettskilder Forord Det juridiske fakultetsbibliotek i Oslo flyttet i 1994 inn i nyrestaurerte lokaler i Domus Bibliotheca. Eldre deler av boksamlingen, som tidligere hadde vært spredt rundt på fakultetet, kunne plasseres i et nytt magasin i kjelleren, og det som siden 1972 hadde vært en egen avdeling for eldre juridisk og rettshistorisk litteratur, Rettshistorisk samling, fikk flytte inn i et fredet biblioteklokale i annen etasje i Domus Bibliotheca Boksamlingene inneholder betydelige mengder eldre norske rettskilder – i tillegg til det som finnes ved andre bibliotek. Som et ekstra hjelpemiddel til å finne frem i dette materialet laget jeg en enkel oversikt til bruk for kolleger i biblioteket og for meg selv, som da var bibliotekar ved Institutt for offentlig rett, med spesielt ansvar for Rettshistorisk samling. I 2002 ble listen i bearbeidet versjon utgitt i serien Det juridiske fakultetsbibliotek skriftserie som nr 16. En revidert og utvidet utgave ble publisert som nettdokument i DUO i 2010. Det er en oppdatering av denne som nå utgis i bibliotekets nye skriftserie. Biblioteket har skiftet navn til Juridisk bibliotek, bibliotekets skriftserie har endret navn tilsvarende og heter nå Juridisk biblioteks skriftserie. Overbibliotekar Randi Halveg Iversby har overtatt hovedansvaret etter mangeårig redaktør Pål Bertnes.
    [Show full text]
  • Lov Og Praksis
    Bøndenes våpenplikt – Lov og praksis Av Martin Teigen Hanssen Institutt for arkeologi, historie, kultur- og religionsvitenskap Historie/HIS350 2017 Forord Om noen hadde fortalt meg for fem år siden at jeg skulle levere en masteroppgave, er det en påstand jeg ikke ville tatt noe særlig seriøst. Men nå sitter jeg her i dag med et ferdig masterprosjekt. Når jeg flyttet fra det kalde nord til, i min måleskala, storbyen Bergen og skulle begynne på Masterstudiet, virket dette som et uoppnåelig prosjekt. Men iløpet av denne utfordrende prosessen har jeg lært utrolig mye, og har lært at ingenting er umulig så lenge man jobber for det. Å jobbe med kilder som er nesten 1000 år gamle og samtidig gå i dybden på et felt jeg tidligere hadde liten kunnskap om tidligere har vært en utrolig lærerik og interessant prosess, og håper at du som leser kan lære like mye som meg om bøndens våpenplikt og våpenting som jeg har. Jeg vil gi en spesiell takk til min veileder Geir Atle Ersland, som har vært et solid faglig anker, og alltid gitt raske og klare tilbakemeldinger. Jeg vil også takke mine medstudenter for gode diskusjoner og inspirasjon gjennom denne prosessen. Samtidig vil jeg og takke familie og venner som har vært godt støtte og hjelp gjennom denne prosessen. Innhold Forord ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.0 Introduksjon......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Report Frafrom Koordineringsenheten the Coordinating Unit for Forvictims Ofre Forof Humanmenneskehandel Trafficking
    RapportReport frafrom Koordineringsenheten the Coordinating Unit for Victimsfor ofre forof Humanmenneskehandel Trafficking 2016 2016 Juli 2017 August 2017 B REPORT BY THE COORDINATING UNIT FOR VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING Table of contents Summary 3 5 The rights of identified presumed victims 44 5.1 What rights do presumed victims have? .................. 44 1 The Coordinating Unit for Victims of Human Trafficking (KOM) 5 5.2 Why do many reject offers of assistance? ............... 44 1.1 A measure to improve coordination ............................. 5 5.3 Legal residence ................................................................. 45 1.2 Collaborating parties ........................................................ 6 5.3.1 Limited residence permits for victims of human 1.3 Mandate up for review ......................................................7 trafficking ........................................................................... 45 1.4 KOM’s situation report .......................................................7 5.3.2 Asylum application decisions where applicants have been identified as presumed victims .............. 47 2 KOM’s activities in 2016 9 5.3.3 Asylum centre residents ................................................ 50 2.1 Network operation and expertise development ..... 9 5.4 Assisted return and re-establishment ...................... 50 2.1.1 Meetings under the auspices of KOM .......................... 9 2.1.2 External meetings and seminars ..................................10 6 Criminal justice responses
    [Show full text]
  • Unofficial Translation
    UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION BORGARTING COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT Pronounced: 23 January 2020 Case no.: 18-060499ASD-BORG/03 Appeal Presiding Judge Eirik Akerlie Judges: Court of Appeal Judge Hedda Remen Court of Appeal Judge Thom Arne Hellerslia Appellants Natur og Ungdom and Advocate Cathrine Hambro Föreningen Greenpeace Advocate Emanuel Feinberg Norden Co-Counsel: Associate Attorney Dagny Ås Hovind Interveners Besteforeldrenes Advocate Cathrine Hambro Klimaaksjon and Advocate Emanuel Feinberg Naturvernforbundet Co-Counsel: Associate Attorney Dagny Ås Hovind Respondent The Government of Advocate Fredrik Sejersted Norway, represented Co-Counsels: by the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. Advocate Anders Flaatin Wilhelmsen Advocate Ane Sydnes Egeland UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION The case involves the question of whether the decision taken by the Royal Decree of 10 June 2016 on awarding production licences for petroleum on the Norwegian continental shelf in Barents Sea South and in Barents Sea South-East, the “23rd Licensing Round” is invalid. The decision was taken pursuant to the Norwegian Act of 29 November 1996 No. 72 relating to Petroleum Activities, Section 3-3. More specifically, the issues in the case are whether the decision is contrary to Article 112 of the Norwegian Constitution, whether the decision is contrary to Article 2 or Article 8 of the European Human Rights Convention, as well as Article 93 or Article 102 of the Norwegian Constitution, and whether the decision is invalid because of procedural errors. The case raises in particular questions regarding the interpretation of Article 112 of the Norwegian Constitution related to whether, and the extent to which, the provision grants rights, and how the provision may be applied to emissions of greenhouse gases.
    [Show full text]
  • The Succession and Coronation of Magnus Erlingsson
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives UNIVERSITY OF OSLO INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY, CONSERVATION AND HISTORY Dissertation for the degree of Master of Arts: Norwegian Kingship Transformed: the Succession and Coronation of Magnus Erlingsson (Depiction of Magnus Erlingsson, by Gerhard Munthe, 1899) Thomas Malo Tollefsen Spring 2015 1 2 Abstract This dissertation is an exploration of the succession and coronation of Magnus Erlingsson based upon three themes: Norwegian kingship in theory, Norwegian kingship in practise, and Norwegian kingship in context, and a search for points of similarity and contrast with European trends. In the first theme the focus of the analysis will be the coronation of Magnus Erlingsson, exploring this in two parts: the rules of kingmaking and the narration of Snorre in the Saga of Magnus Erlingsson, and motivations behind the coronation. In the second theme the focus will again be on the coronation of Magnus Erlingsson. First, this dissertation attempts to put together a workable timeline from when Magnus is acclaimed king in 1161 to his coronation in either 1163 or 1164. Then the analysis shifts to the coronation itself, before it falls on the coronation oath and the Letter of Privileges to see what they can tell us about Magnus’s kingship, and the Law of Succession and what it meant for the future. In the third theme this dissertation attempts to contextualise Magnus’s kingship and this chapter will focus on two things: acquisition, and by extension how to legitimise your rule once it has been acquired, and succession to kingship.
    [Show full text]
  • The Churches of the Holy Land in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries 198
    Tracing the Jerusalem Code 1 Tracing the Jerusalem Code Volume 1: The Holy City Christian Cultures in Medieval Scandinavia (ca. 1100–1536) Edited by Kristin B. Aavitsland and Line M. Bonde The research presented in this publication was funded by the Research Council of Norway (RCN), project no. 240448/F10. ISBN 978-3-11-063485-3 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-063943-8 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-063627-7 DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110639438 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Library of Congress Control Number: 2020950181 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2021 Kristin B. Aavitsland and Line M. Bonde, published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. The book is published open access at www.degruyter.com. Cover illustration: Wooden church model, probably the headpiece of a ciborium. Oslo University Museum of Cultural history. Photo: CC BY-SA 4.0 Grete Gundhus. Typesetting: Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd. Printing and binding: CPI Books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com In memory of Erling Sverdrup Sandmo (1963–2020) Contents List of Maps and Illustrations XI List of Abbreviations XVII Editorial comments for all three volumes XIX Kristin B. Aavitsland, Eivor Andersen Oftestad, and Ragnhild Johnsrud
    [Show full text]
  • To Read the Report of the EFTA Court 2019
    REPORT OF THE EFTA COURT 2019 eftacourt.int Reproduction is authorised, provided that the source REPORT is acknowledged. The recommended mode of citation of the EFTA Court’s case law is either of the following: – Casenumber,namesoftheparties(option1). – Casenumber,dateofthejudgment,namesofthe OF THE parties(option2). EFTA Court 1rueduFortThüngen EFTA COURT L-1499Luxembourg www.eftacourt.int 2019 Concept and Design by Imprimerie Centrale, Luxembourg Printed by Imprimerie Centrale, Luxembourg 4 | Foreword Foreword | 5 Lookingbackontheyear2019,ithasbeenasuccessfuloneforthe Court and the EEA Agreement as a whole. I am pleased to observe thatwewitnessedanincreaseinthecaseloadoftheCourt,with13 newcasesbeingregistered,ofwhich12wererequestsforanadvisory opinion.Ofthesecases,fivestemfromquasi-judicialandadministrative bodies outside the regular Court system. This represents an interesting development,whichIbelieveisreflectiveoftheimportantrolethese bodies play in the application of EEA law in the EFTA States. We also witnessedfirstrequestsfromboththeIcelandicandNorwegianPublic ProcurementComplaintsBoards. TherequestfromtheIcelandicTribunalwasthefirstrequestforan advisory opinion received from Iceland in well over two years, and itisnowmorethantwo-and-a-halfyearssincearequesthasbeen received from an Icelandic court. This represents a considerable cause for concern, and we can only hope that this tendency will not continue for much longer. Asregardsjudgmentshandeddownin2019,Fosen-Linjen II is the most noteworthy.TheNorwegianSupremeCourtdecidedtorequestasecond
    [Show full text]