DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Report 2014 2 Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Report 2014 2 Contents SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY SUPREME COURT ANNUAL REPORT 2014 2 CONTENTS C O N T E N T S The Supreme Court in 2014 Page 4 Summary of Supreme Court cases and procedure Page 6 The Supreme Court in 1814 and 2014 Page 7 - Establishment and appointment of justices Page 8 - New justices continue the proud tradition Page 11 - The Supreme Court expands Page 12 Preparations for the Supreme Court's bicentenary celebration Page 15 A selection of cases from 2014 Page 16 Dissenting opinions in the Supreme Court Page 22 Conventions on human rights and the Supreme Court Page 24 The EEA agreement and the Supreme Court Page 26 Supreme Court justices Page 31 The Supreme Court's administration Page 34 Court Usher - what is that? Page 40 County Tour 2014 Page 42 Outside the courtroom Page 44 Statistics Page 46 Front page, the Supreme Court's visit to the millennium site at Gulating (Photo: Henrik Tveit) 3 THE SUPREME COURT IN 2014 In 2014 we celebrated the Norwegian Constitutional Bicentenary. The Constitution established the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government, with judicial power vested in the Supreme Court and the subordinate courts. The Constitution is the foundation on which Norway, as a democracy based on the rule of law, was built. During its first fifty years as the supreme judicial power, the Supreme Court developed the basic framework of judicial review of the legislative and executive branches. All laws must conform with the limitations that follow from the Constitution. In the event of conflict, the Constitution prevails or the law must be interpreted restrictively, in order to eliminate the conflict. Executive decisions must be made within the framework of the law, and they must be based on fact and prudent administrative procedures. Executive discretion, when exercised, must not be clearly unjust. Decisions that fail to comply with these constraints are dismissed as unlawful. Over the last twenty years, the supervisory role of the judicial branch has expanded to include judicial review of law and administrative decisions, examining whether they conflict with conventions on 4 SUPREME COURT SUPREME basic human rights, which were incorporated into 1815, and there were centenary and Norwegian law through the Human Rights Act of sesquicentenary celebrations on 30 June in 1999. Many of the rights protected by these 1915 and 1965, respectively. The bicentenary conventions have now been anchored in the celebration for the Supreme Court will be held on Constitution with the constitutional amendments 30 June 2015. of May 2014. Compliance with these rights is now subject to constitutional review. 2014 was a busy year for the Supreme Court, with many important cases. This year, like last year, The judicial review carried out by the judicial we have tried to present the institution in a wider branch of the other two branches of government perspective, moving beyond mere case summaries are central to Norway's standing as a nation based and dry statistics. on the rule of law. Judicial review is a core undertaking for the Supreme Court and the As a prelude to the bicentenary, we look into two subordinate courts, along with settling disputes in "extremes" on the timeline, presenting some key civil cases and passing judgment in criminal cases. events in Supreme Court history from 1814 and 2014, respectively. The report also presents the Until the dissolution of the union with Denmark in highlights of the bicentenary celebration of 1814, there was a joint Danish-Norwegian Supreme the Supreme Court. Court based in Copenhagen. After the dissolution of the union, this became a purely Danish Supreme I hope you find the report interesting. Court, which could no longer hear cases from Norway. Putting together a Norwegian Supreme Oslo, 2 January 2015 Court took some time, but efforts to establish it began immediately upon the signing of the Constitution on 17 May 1814. The Supreme Court of Norway met for its first Tore Schei session and delivered its first judgment on 30 June 5 SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT CASES AND PROCEDURE Section 88 of the Constitution provides that "the It is up to the lawyers to convince the Appeals Supreme Court decides in the final instance". Selection Committee that precisely their client's case should be heard by the Supreme Court in From this, it follows that the Supreme Court is the chambers. Generally, this is done in a brief and country’s highest court in all types of cases. The concise appeal, highlighting the issue or issues of main task of the Supreme Court is to contribute, principle at stake. through its decisions, to a clarification and an evolution of the law within the framework that As mentioned above, the Appeals Selection follows from the Constitution and prevailing law. Committee decides whether or not to refer an appeal to the Supreme Court for a hearing in Any appeal to the Supreme Court against a chambers. The Appeals Selection Committee is judgment by the Court of Appeal must be granted comprised of three Supreme Court justices. They leave from the Appeals Selection Committee of the decide on the basis of the case documents. The Supreme Court. The condition for granting leave to cases that go forward are decided by one of the appeal pursuant to procedural legislation is two chambers set with five justices, or, in normally that a decision by the Supreme Court will exceptional cases, by a so-called reinforced court – be of importance in terms of principle; it must a plenary session of the Supreme Court with all 20 provide important legal guidance for other cases. justices or a grand chamber set with 11 justices. Even though a Supreme Court decision will only be legally binding for the parties to that particlar case, Cases are heard orally – counsel for the appellant the Supreme Court's position as a stare decisis accounts for the legal and factual issues court means that any decision it delivers will have the Supreme Court has to consider. These oral implications for anyone involved in similar cases. proceedings are open to the public. Anyone can enter the courtroom and listen in — all you have to Many court of appeal decisions are appealed, but do is show up. The Supreme Court's website, only a small portion of these are granted leave. www.hoyesterett.no, has information on the The odds of having your case heard by the court cases to be heard, specifying the subject matter of in chambers are long, both legally and in practical each case and when it is scheduled for hearing. terms. This stringent "filtering" is necessary for the Supreme Court to have enough time to hear the When a judgment is delivered, it is published on truly important cases. the website — in the form of a brief summary as well as the full text of the judgment for anyone who might be interested. Photo: Jiri Havran THE SUPREME COURT IN 1814 AND 2014 Over the next few pages, we highlight some major events in the court's history from the constitutional year of 1814 and the bicentenary year of 2014 7 THE SUPREME COURT IN 1814 ESTABLISHMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF JUSTICES During the union, Norway and Denmark had a joint These six were Councillor Hans Falbe, Justice Peter Danish-Norwegian Supreme Court. It was seated Collett, Court of Appeal Judge Jørgen Mandix, in Copenhagen. Upon the dissolution of the union Court of Appeal Judge Jens Petter Debes, Chief by the Treaty of Kiel of 14 January 1814, this joint Local Judge Andreas Kiønig and City Judge Fredrik arrangement ceased to exist. The new situation Motzfeldt. Kiønig and Motzfeldt had participated required Norway, as a free country, to establish its in the Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll. The age own Supreme Court. Section 89 of the Constitution of the justices ranged from 35 to 65 years old. In of 17 May 1814 thus reads: addition to the justices, a justice secretary and two clerks of record. "To decide in the final instance, one must, as soon as possible, establish a Supreme Court, which must Chief Justice Bull's annual "emoluments" was set to not comprise less than the Chief Justice and 6 4000 riksbankdaler, whereas the salary of the other appointed justices." justices varied between 2000 and 2600 riksbankdaler. The justice and clerks of record and The term "as soon as possible" was taken literally. law would be paid 1400 and 1000 riksbankdaler per On 25 May 1914, just days after the Norwegian year, respectively. Constituent Assembly, the government began working to establish the new court. They worked The government could not have found a better man fast. In July, a draft "mandate" for the Supreme than Johan Randolf Bull to take office as chief Court was ready. This draft provided that the justice. He was a man of "sound judgment and procedure would be part oral, part written, humanist values in combination with longstanding depending on the case. However, this was a experience and a pragmatic approach to the controversial issue. The debate continued almost realities of life". At 65 years old, his until the Supreme Court was formally established a contemporaries referred to him as the year later, on 30 June 1815. "distinguished old man"—a nickname that speaks volumes about the average life expectancy at the On 27 September 1814, the government appointed time, which was about 40 years. Johan Randolf Bull, the County Governor of Bergen, as the first Supreme Court Chief Justice. Councillor Falbe claimed he had been assured In addition, the six other justices—or assessors, as repeatedly by King Christian Frederik that he would 8 they were called back then—were also appointed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report for 2004
    Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission Annual Report for 2004 The Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission is an independent body which considers whether a convicted person should have his/her case retried by another court. 1 Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission Annual Report for 2004 The Criminal Cases Review Commission’s activities and composition The Criminal Cases Review Commission was set up following a revision of Chapter 27 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The amendment came into force on 1 January 2004. The Commission has five permanent members and three alternates, all of whom are appointed by the King in Council. The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson [I’m not sure whether this is the done thing in Norway – our first chairperson was female and this is the way she was designated] and one member must hold a university degree in law [LLM]. The Chairperson is appointed for a period of five years and members for a period of three years. The Commission is made up as follows: Chairperson: Janne Kristiansen Vice Chairperson: Ann-Kristin Olsen, Governor of Vest-Agder County Members: Vidar Stensland, Court of Appeal Judge at the Hålogaland Court of Appeal. Svein Magnussen, Professor of Psychology at the University of Oslo. Anne Kathrine Slungård, Director of Communications at SINTEF. Alternates: Anne Elisabeth Landsverk, District Court Judge at the Skien and Porsgrunn District Court (until October 2004) Helen Sæter, District Court Judge at the Fredrikstad District Court (from October 2004) Harald Stabell, advocate and defence counsel Øystein Mæland, Chief Consultant/Head of Department at Ullevål University Hospital. The Commission’s Chairperson is also employed full-time as Head of the Secretariat.
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Whole Judgment
    SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY On 12 May 2016, the Supreme Court gave judgment in HR-2016-01015-A (case no. 2016/416), criminal case, appeal against judgment A (Counsel Arild Dyngeland) v. The public prosecution authority (Public Prosecutor Per Morten Schjetne) VOTING : (1) Justice Utgård: The case concerns sentence for obstruction of justice in the form of retaliation against five participants in civil cases, see the Penal Code 1902 section 132 a. (2) On 16 March 2015, Lofoten District Court gave judgment concluding as follows: "A, born 00.00.1976, is acquitted of the main indictment count IV. A, born 00.00.1976, is convicted of violation of the Penal Code section 132a subsection 1b, cf. subsection 2, cf. subsection 4 first penal option, the Penal Code section 390a and the Penal Code section 333, all considered against the Penal Code section 62 subsection 1 and section 63 subsection 2, and sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment. Four months of the sentence is to be suspended pursuant to the Penal Code sections 52- 54 with a probation period of 2 years. Credit for time in custody is 5 days." (3) The convicted person appealed to Hålogaland Court of Appeal against the findings of fact in the determination of guilt on all counts. Leave to appeal was granted for the counts concerning the Penal Code 1902 section 132a, but was refused for the counts concerning the Penal Code 1902 section 390a and section 333. The court of appeal stated that the sentence would be reviewed as a result of the partial admission of the appeal against the findings of fact.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2 014 COPY LAYOUT PRINT PHOTOS the Norwegian Newmarketing AS PJ-Trykk, Oslo Lars A
    ANNUAL REPORT 2 014 COPY LAYOUT PRINT PHOTOS The Norwegian Newmarketing AS PJ-trykk, Oslo Lars A. Lien Bureau for the Marte Garmann Investigation of Ruben Skarsvåg Police Affairs Anders Nordmeland Getty Images Politiforum iStock Photo Politihøgskolen A police officer should view control and investigation of his activities as a natural part of his professional engagement. CONTENTS FOREWORD Foreword 3 access by the accused. In its work on able for the first time to meet all of the the case, the Bureau has been criticised first-year students at the Police University 10 years since the Bureau was established 4 by lawyers and the media for imposing College. The Bureau held lectures for such radical measures. It has been students in Stavern, Oslo, Kongsvinger Approval of Overtime 10 pointed out that the Bureau uses “police and Bodø. In our view, it is important that methods”. The Bureau is an investigation police employees from the basic course Custody/Incidents involving Persons in Police Custody 11 agency, not a supervisory body. It is the onwards are aware of society’s need for Police Methodology and Methodological Development 14 responsibility of the Bureau to investigate control of the police’s use of its powers. and, when there are grounds for so doing, A police officer should view control Notification of Complaints 15 to prosecute employees of the police and investigation of his/her activities and prosecuting authority. In questions as a natural part of his/her professional “The police do not answer my enquiries” 16 regarding law enforcement, we act within engagement. the framework of the legislation adopted Misuse of Police Records 17 by the politicians and under the control The Bureau wishes to commemorate of the courts.
    [Show full text]
  • The Supreme Court of Norway
    THE SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY On 28 June 2017, the Supreme Court gave judgment in HR-2017-1297-A, (case no. 2017/445), civil case, appeal against judgment and case no. 2017/474, appeal against order ING Bank N.V. (Counsel Henning Harborg Counsel Peder Alvik Sanengen – qualifying test case) v. The Bankruptcy estate of (Counsel Kristoffer Larsen Rognvik Bergen Bunkers AS – qualifying test case) Assisting counsel Egil Horstad) OPINION: (1) Acting justice Kaasen: The case concerns the dismissal of an action from a Norwegian bankruptcy estate against a foreign secured party due to lack of jurisdiction, and the choice of law if the case is not dismissed. (2) Bergen Bunkers AS (hereinafter Bergen Bunkers) engaged in the purchase and sale of bunkers (ship fuel) and in bunker brokerage. The company was wholly owned by O.W. Bunker Norway AS, and both companies were part of a large group. The Danish company O.W. Bunker & Trading A/S was the parent company of the group and had subsidiaries in a number of countries. (3) ING Bank N.V. (hereinafter ING) is a Dutch bank acting as agent and lender under a loan agreement where a number of lenders granted the O.W. Bunker group a loan of 2 USD 700 000 000. The loan agreement was entered into on 19 December 2013 under the condition that the Danish parent company and a total of sixteen other group companies granted security for the loan. ING would also be granted a security interest in the group companies' trade receivables. (4) Bergen Bunkers was not a direct borrower under the loan agreement, but the loan amount was "streamed" downwards in the group so that Bergen Bunkers could also benefit from the loan.
    [Show full text]
  • JUDGMENT Pronounced 22 December 2020 by the Supreme
    UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION JUDGMENT pronounced 22 December 2020 by the Supreme Court of Norway in plenary session with Chief Justice Toril Marie Øie Justice Jens Edvin A. Skoghøy Justice Bergljot Webster Justice Wilhelm Matheson Justice Aage Thor Falkanger Justice Kristin Normann Justice Henrik Bull Justice Knut H. Kallerud Justice Arne Ringnes Justice Ingvald Falch Justice Espen Bergh Justice Cecilie Østensen Berglund Justice Borgar Høgetveit Berg Justice Erik Thyness Judge Kine Steinsvik HR-2020-2472-P, (case no. 20-051052SIV-HRET) Appeal from the Borgarting Court of Appeal judgment of 23 January 2020. Natur og Ungdom Föreningen Greenpeace Norden Naturvernforbundet (Friends of the Earth Norway) (Intervenor) Besteforeldrenes klimaaksjon (Norwegian (Advocate Emanuel Feinberg – for assessment Grandparents Climate Campaign) (Intervenor) Advocate Cathrine Hambro – for assessment) versus The Government of Norway through the (the office of the Attorney Ministry of Petroleum and Energy General of Norway in the person of Advocate Fredrik Sejersted) (Co-Counsel Advocate Anders Flaatin Wilhelmsen) UNOFFICIAL TRANSLATION 2 VOTING (1) Justice Høgetveit Berg: The issues in the case and its background Subject matter in the case (2) The case involves the issue of whether a Royal Decree of 10 June 2016 is invalid. The decree – the Decision – involves awarding 10 petroleum production licences for a total of 40 blocks or sub-blocks on the Norwegian continental shelf in the maritime area referred to as Barents Sea South and Barents Sea South-East – the 23rd
    [Show full text]
  • MULTICONSULT ASA Initial Public Offering of up to 10,600,000 Shares
    MULTICONSULT ASA Initial public offering of up to 10,600,000 Shares with an indicative price range of NOK 75 to NOK 78 per Share Listing of the Company's Shares on Oslo Børs This Prospectus (the "Prospectus") has been prepared by Multiconsult ASA, a public limited liability company incorporated under the laws of Norway (the "Company" and together with its subsidiaries and affiliated companies "Multiconsult" or the "Group"), solely for use in connection with (i) the initial public offering of up to 10,600,000 shares of the Company (the "Offering") and (ii) the related listing of the Company's shares (the "Shares") on Oslo Børs (the "Listing"). The Shares included in the Offering (the "Offer Shares") are offered by Stiftelsen Multiconsult (the "Lead Selling Shareholder"), a financial foundation organised under the laws of Norway and certain other shareholders as listed and described in Section 11 "The selling shareholders" (collectively, the "Selling Shareholders"). The Company will not receive any of the proceeds from the Offer Shares sold by the Selling Shareholders. The Offering consists of: (i) a private placement to (a) investors in Norway, (b) institutional investors outside Norway and the United States of America (the "U.S." or the "United States"), subject to applicable exemptions from applicable prospectus requirements, and (c) "qualified institutional buyers" ("QIBs") in the United States as defined in, and in reliance on, Rule 144A ("Rule 144A") under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "U.S. Securities Act") (the "Institutional Offering"), and (ii) a retail offering to the public in Norway (the "Retail Offering").
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2015 Contents
    SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY SUPREME COURT ANNUAL REPORT 2015 CONTENTS CONTENTS The Supreme Court in its bicentenary year 2015 Page 4 Summary of Supreme Court cases and procedure Page 6 The Supreme Court’s Bicentenary Page 7 - “HONOURABLE GENTLEMEN!” Page 8 - 200 years in two minutes – It began in a library Page 10 - The Bicentenary Meeting Page 12 Bicentenary celebration at Akershus castle Page 14 Open house in the Supreme Court Page 16 Justice Tjomsland captivates his audience Page 18 “The most difficult thing I have ever done as a researcher” Page 20 A powerful meeting with the lions Page 21 Law Truth Justice Page 22 Supreme Court commemorative stamp Page 23 A selection of cases from 2015 Page 24 The Supreme Court and International Law Page 29 Supreme Court Justices Page 31 Justice Liv Gjølstad looks back Page 33 The Supreme Court's administration Page 36 Rizwana Yedicam informs Page 41 New faces Page 42 County tour 2015 Page 43 Outside the courtroom Page 44 Statistics Page 46 Cover page: The Justice Building in Christiania 1903, which is now the Supreme Court Building. Photo: Unknown photographer Oslo Museum 2 3 Photo: Morten Brakestad SUPREME COURT SUPREME THE SUPREME COURT IN ITS BICENTENARY YEAR Under the Norwegian Constitution of 1814, the entertainment, etc. outside the building. year, judiciary service has carried on as usual, and Supreme Court is one of our three constitutional The event attracted an enthusiastic crowd. You can as such, 2015 has been a busy year with many bodies. However, it took time to establish a read more about the various events in the important cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2010 AF Group Annual Report Company
    Highlights 2010 annual reportAF Group 2010 Record profit The AF Group ended its 2010 anniversary year with the highest annual net profit in the history of the AF Group annual reportAF Group 2010 company. Profit before tax for 2010 was NOK 372 million, corresponding to a profit margin of 6.4 per cent. While the outlook for the five business areas varies, overall the AF Group is well positioned for the future from both an organisational and financial standpoint. Financially sound position At the end of 2010 AF had NOK 580 million in net interest-bearing receivables and an equity ratio of 32.1 per cent. Thanks to the sale of parts of the Environ- mental Base at Vats and profits from operations AF is financially strong and well equipped to meet opportunities and challenges in the time to come. High activity and good performance in Civil Engineering AF’s Civil Engineering business area reported its highest level of activity and earnings ever in 2010. Revenues in 2010 amounted to NOK 2,158 million and profit before tax was NOK 198 million, equivalent to a profit margin of 9.2 per cent. All the Civil Engineering units performed very well during the year. Historically low level of injuries HSE has high priority at AF and is an integral part of management at all levels. In 2010, AF had a historically low level of injuries, with an LTI rate of 1.7 for the Norwegian part of the business. The LTI rate is defined as the number of lost time injuries per million man- hours, and AF includes all sub-contractors in the Annual report 2010 calculation.
    [Show full text]
  • Resurrection of Divine Law
    Do More Good Deeds! Words are our Best Weapon Against the Lies of History (Truth in the Root of the Word). Press Release - Public Notice - Public Record FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE OSLO – INDIGENOUS AMERICAN SUES NORWAY 100 MILLION KRONER FOR FULL DISCLOSURE OSLO, NORWAY 01 September 2014 – Citing events from January 14-17 2013 and January 24, 2013. Sovereign Crown Denderah Cherokee Washitaw Brothers El was arrested and detained at a Oslo Police Station in Gronland; and later moved to a Holding Center at Trandum (outside of Oslo), claiming she over-stayed her Visa. In the article, Unlawful Detainment and Kidnapping U.N. Violations, she recounts the mistreatment and unlawful tactics used to get her to claim possession of the passport, which officers retrieved from the U.S. Embassy in Oslo. The passport was returned in 2011 and relinquished with the Implied U.S. Citizenship. See Original June 2011 Announcement American Relinquish IMPLIED U.S. Citizenship to Save Lives http://beforeitsnews.com/international/2011/06/american-relinquish-u-s-citizenship-to-save-lives-760657.html The One hundred Million kroner (100,000,000 kr) charge is against the Norwegian Police Department for the arrest, detention and inhumane treatment. She states, “such violations should have never occurred considering evidence was presented to both the arresting officers, and station officers.” Relating to her status (stateless, foreign to their jurisdiction) and standing (Sovereign Crown, Indigenous American). Sovereign Crown Denderah states recent vandalism and attacks on her physical body has caused her to invoke members of the Norwegian Supreme Court under her authority to reclaim her property, establish shelter and diplomatic (Foreign Emissary) protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Homicides in Norway
    Homicides in Norway: Exploring the Characteristics and Decline Between 1991 and 2015 Malin Sæth Hanset Spring 2019 Master’s thesis in Criminology Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law Faculty of Law University of Oslo Homicides in Norway: Exploring the Characteristics and Decline between 1991 and 2015 II Copyright Malin Sæth Hanset 2019 Homicides in Norway: Exploring the Characteristics and Decline between 1991 and 2015 Malin Sæth Hanset http://www.duo.uio.no Trykk: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo III Summary Title: Homicides in Norway: Exploring the Characteristics and Decline Between 1991 and 2015 Author: Malin Sæth Hanset Supervisor: Nina Jon Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law Faculty of Law University of Oslo Spring 2019 This thesis considers homicides in Norway between 1991 and 2015 and the decline that can be seen in this period. What it seeks to do is to look into what characterise homicides in this period, in which type of homicide can the decline be seen, has every type of homicide seen a decrease and lastly, has specific types of homicides disappeared or experienced a more dramatic decrease. This was done by looking at the Homicide Overview from the National Criminal Investigation Service Norway and by a content analysis of 82 judicial verdicts. It is quantitative content analysis as it counts variables, but it is mostly a qualitative analysis as it seeks to give a deeper understanding of the homicides. The homicides were divided into four categories; intimate partner homicides; homicides between friends, acquaintances and colleagues; familial homicides; and homicides between other relations (strangers, the perpetrators/victim used a service that the victim/perpetrator provided, and unspecified relations).
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2 015 COPY LAYOUT PHOTOS the Norwegian Bureau Newmarketing AS Lars A
    ANNUAL REPORT 2 015 COPY LAYOUT PHOTOS The Norwegian Bureau Newmarketing AS Lars A. Lien for the Investigation of Tore Letvik, Juristkontakt Police Affairs PRINT Politiforum PJ-trykk, Oslo iStock Photo Police Inspectorate of Kosova Thomas Haugersveen, Politiforum CONTENTS Foreword 3 The 10th Anniversary of the Bureau 4 Police Ethics 6 Investigation of Police Shootings 8 Accidental Shootings 10 Misuse of Police Records 12 Dealing with Requests for Assistance 14 International Cooperation in 2015 16 Necessary for or Considerably Facilitating Performance of Duty 18 New Provisions concerning Offences Committed in the course of Official Duty 20 Statistics 2015 22 Decisions to Prosecute 2015 26 Court Cases 2015 32 Emergency Turn-outs 2015 34 Administrative Assessments 2015 36 The Bureau’s Organisation and Staffing 38 Who Works at the Bureau – The Director of the Bureau 40 241 651 Who Works at the Bureau? – The Investigation Divisions 42 Trykksak Articles from Previous Annual Reports 46 Both the police and society at large undergo continual change. It is important for the Bureau to maintain a level of professionalism that enables assignments to be dealt with thoroughly and efficiently and as independently as possible. FOREWORD n several of its annual reports, the days, but the average processing time in Bureau has drawn attention to ques- 2015 was 204 days. The increase from 2014 I tions concerning deprivation of to 2015 was expected, and was brought liberty and the use of police custody. This about by the need to delay investigations was also a major topic when the Bureau and other processing in a number of commemorated 10 years of operation in cases owing to work on the above case May 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Analysis of the Pilot Courts Replies to the Questionnaire Prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre
    Strasbourg, 11 December 2008 CEPEJ- SATURN(2008)7 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE (CEPEJ) Groupe de Pilotage of the SATURN Centre for judicial time management (CEPEJ-SATURN) Data analysis of the pilot courts replies to the questionnaire prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre Working document Data analysis of the pilot courts replies to the questionnaire prepared by the Steering Group of the SATURN Centre of the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice of the Council of Europe − Draft, 20 November 2008 Marco Fabri and Domenico Piscitelli1 Research Institute on Judicial Systems, National Research Council, Italy Research Centre for Judicial Studies, University of Bologna, Italy Introduction This analysis is based on the replies to the questionnaire designed by the SATURN Centre of the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice of the Council of Europe. The first section is an Executive Summary, the second section is the Data Analysis. The Appendix, as requested by the SATURN working group, entails four documents: a) the detailed tables that were not decided to include in the main Data Analysis, b) the complete answers to the so called “hypothetical cases”, c) the questionnaire, d) the Programme known as “Strasbourg” implemented by the court of first instance of Turin, Italy. Executive Summary Data analysis synthesis The courts that replied to the questionnaire were 79 from 27 countries. Most of the replies came from Serbia (27), “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (15), and Georgia (5). As agreed by the SATURN Group, in order to have a balanced database, it was decided to include in this analysis only the official pilot courts, and not more than two courts for the countries mentioned above.
    [Show full text]