ANNUAL REPORT CONTENT TEXT Foreword 3 Norwegian Bureau for the Investigation of Police Affairs LAYOUT Driving through red lights during emergency turn-outs 4 Newmarketing AS PRINT X-IDE Visit by a delegation from Georgia 6 COVER PHOTO Gorm Kallestad, NTB scanpix Experiential learning in the police 8 IMAGES Ole Berg-rusten / NTB scanpix Gorm Kallestad / NTB scanpix Berit Roald / NTB scanpix User survey 9 Ateliér Klingwall Lars A. Lien From random checks to full control 10 Statistics 2018 12 Police weapon management 16 Administrative assessments 2018 18 Emergency turn-outs 2018 22 Court cases 2018 24 Decisions to prosecute 2018 28 The Bureau’s organisation and staffing 32 Articles from previous annual reports 35 FOREWORD judges) ruled that the case was to be retried Supreme Court stated that, when assessing before other judges. The court was unanimous the seriousness of an act of corruption, regard in finding the former senior police officer guilty. must be paid to the category of public official The court’s order that the case be retried has concerned, and that police officers are in a been appealed to the Supreme Court. class of their own: “They exercise extensive authority on behalf of the public, and it is The case has been followed closely by the essential that they enjoy general public trust. media, which have given detailed attention to Corrupt acts committed by police officers the various aspects of the case, providing a undermine confidence in the legal system, and running commentary on the presentation of such crimes represent a threat to important evidence, including the testimonies of both principles fundamental to our society, not the defendant and the witnesses. However least the principle of equality before the law. a recurrent question from the media to the If there is a general impression that persons Bureau has concerned the cost of the case. with sufficient means or contacts can buy How much money has the Bureau used on the themselves out of statutory obligations case? The answer is that, in connection with or decisions by public authorities, this will or several years, the Bureau has investigations in 2014 and 2015, the Bureau negatively impact confidence in the rule of law.” received considerable attention in received additional allocations totalling F connection with criminal proceedings NOK 17.2 million. Other costs in connection The travaux préparatoires to the new penal against a former senior police officer who, on with the case have been covered within the provisions concerning corruption introduced 6 February 2016, on the orders of the Director Bureau’s regular allocation. In the view of the in 2003 refer to the small extent to which of Public Prosecutions, was indicted for aiding Bureau, processing of the case by the courts corruption has been detected in Norway. In and abetting import of a considerable quantity has clearly shown that it was correct to apply legally enforceable judgments in the Bureau’s of narcotic drugs and for gross corruption. At society’s resources to investigating the case in portfolio, we find that six persons have been Oslo District Court, the senior police officer question. convicted of corruption since 2005. Four was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of of the six persons held police posts. We can 21 years. The appeal was heard at Borgarting In all cases, investigations must be conducted thus affirm today that there is a real risk of Court of Appeal from August 2018 to January with efficiency and appropriate competence corruption in the police. Out of regard for 2019. On Monday 28 January 2019, the and not cost more than necessary. As a society and the rule of law, we must be willing jury answered “no” to the principal question society, we must not be reticent with regard to pay the necessary cost of detecting and of whether the former senior police officer to cases concerning suspicion of corruption prosecuting corruption. was guilty of aiding and abetting import of in the police or omit to investigate and narcotic drugs, and “yes” to the principal bring such cases before the courts although question of whether he had received an investigations may be extensive and costly. In improper advantage in connection with his connection with the processing of a previous Jan Egil Presthus post (corruption). After the jury had delivered police corruption case (Norwegian Supreme Director of the Norwegian Bureau for the its verdict, the court (the three professional Court Reports Rt. 2011, page 477), the Investigation of Police Affairs 4 Norwegian Bureau for the Investigation of Police Affairs Annual Report 2018 DRIVING THROUGH RED LIGHTS DURING EMERGENCY TURN-OUTS Driving through red lights places additional demands on the duty of the driver of an emergency vehicle to show due care and to alert other road users. The driver of an emergency vehicle must reduce his speed sufficiently to be able to stop immediately for any crossing or oncoming traffic, and must as a general rule use a blue light and siren. 5 n 2018, the Bureau fined six police officers supporting the police in their responsibility for who, during an emergency turn-out, had protection of major interests of society.” DRIVING THROUGH RED LIGHTS I driven through a red light and collided with other road users who had driven or walked into The due care norm provided in section 3 the intersection through a green light. of the Road Traffic Act also applies to the police during emergency turn-outs. Practice During an emergency turn-out, the police may of the due care norm in an emergency turn- DURING drive through a red light (see section 11 of the out situation must be assessed for the Road Traffic Act and section 2 (4) (a) and (b) specific situation. The need to carry out the of the Traffic Rules). Emergency turn-outs assignment must be weighed against road are described in more detail in the Norwegian safety considerations. Police Directorate’s Instructions for Emergency EMERGENCY Turn-outs and Pursuit of Vehicles. Emergency Driving through a red light increases the turn-outs may only be made “when necessary risk of road traffic accidents. Motorists who for saving lives, limiting personal injuries or have collided with a police car at traffic considerable material damage, safeguarding lights generally state that they did not see important evidence, making arrests or the police car before they themselves drove TURN-OUTS into the intersection through a green light. Testimony shows that road users may have a different perception of the traffic, and respond differently than the driver of the emergency vehicle expects. Visibility into the intersection may play a part in determining what other road users perceive and whether they see the emergency turn-out vehicle. Owing to the increased risk, additional demands are placed on the driver of an emergency vehicle to show due care and to alert other road users of the emergency driving. Pursuant to section 2 (4) of the Traffic Rules and the Emergency Turn-out Instructions, the driver must reduce his speed sufficiently to be able to stop immediately for any crossing or oncoming traffic, and the driving may only continue if this can be done without risk. The police must also use a blue light and siren. The alert may only be wholly or partly dispensed with if so indicated by official considerations, in which case the requirements regarding due care are even more stringent. In several of the cases dealt with by the Bureau in 2018, only a blue light was used to alert other road users although there was no information in the cases indicating that sirens could be dispensed with. The Bureau has discussed other factors concerning emergency turn-outs in the annual report for 2015, pages 18 and 19. 6 Norwegian Bureau for the Investigation of Police Affairs Annual Report 2018 FROM LEFT: Marika Zakareishvili (Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport) Rati Ionatamishvili (Head of the delegation, Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee, Healthcare and Social Issues Department) Helle Gulseth (Chief Investigation Officer at the Norwegian Bureau for the Investigation of Police Affairs) George Tughushi (Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee, Legal Department) Maia Kipshidze (Georgia’s Ambassador to Norway) Natia Sebiskveradze (Adviser at the Georgian Embassy in Norway) The delegation also included: Dimitri Tskitishvili (Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee, Foreign Policy Department) 7 VISIT BY A DELEGATION FROM GEORGIA ne of the topics the delegation was six years. The period cannot be extended. interested in knowing more about was ONorwegian practice and experience When the law entered into force on 1 January In October 2018, the Bureau regarding investigation of reports concerning 2019, the jurisdiction of the Data Protection received a delegation from the criminal offences committed by police Inspectorate was extended to include employees. The delegation was particularly investigation of cases involving allegations of Georgian parliament that was in interested in information on measures Norway torture, inhuman and degrading treatment as Norway to visit Norwegian public has implemented to ensure independence well as abuse of authority. The mandate also authorities. of service and impartiality in investigations. includes investigation of the death of persons The delegation was also interested in the detained against their will by the police or by organisational structure of the public other public agencies, in police custody, in prosecution authority and its role during prisons or in other institutions. investigation of such matters. The Bureau provided information on its organisation and The investigation will be under the supervision mandate and on the various types of case it of the public prosecution authority, which will deals with. also prosecute the cases. This supervision will be carried out by a separate unit of the The delegation informed that, in 2018, the public prosecution authority or by specialised Georgian parliament had adopted an Act prosecution lawyers.