Subscription 790/year or 190/quarter

Norway fails Snowden

Edward Snowden has sued the Norwegian state for being free to receive the Ossietzky Prize in November. It is the setting for a legal settlement that will have significance far beyond the requirement in the application.




(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)

 

Snowden's exile in Russia is already a geopolitically inflamed case, and the lawsuit against Norway can have an impact both on his legal status, on the whistleblower institute as such and on the power of the surveillance state. Ny Tid has spoken with William Nygaard, chairman of the board of Norsk PEN, about the background for Edward Snowden being awarded the Ossietzky Prize. "We want to honor him for his independence and integrity, and his willingness to do something that costs him a lot without any agenda other than following his own conscience," says Nygaard. "His clairvoyance, the fact that he sees the consequence of what such rampant surveillance can do to our societies, is very important, and it must be made visible."

PEN is a partner in Snowden's lawsuit, and has been endorsed by Norwegian press organizations. "The charges against him are that he has betrayed his country – but if the offenses for which he is sought to be extradited have political content, he cannot be extradited under the Extradition Act," Nygaard explains.

The Norwegian state, for its part, seeks to get Oslo District Court to dismiss the lawsuit on the basis of procedural claims. "We argue that a case of extradition must be dealt with in accordance with the rules of the Extradition Act," says Attorney Christian Reusch of the Government Attorney. "This means, among other things, that the person must be in Norway and that the case according to the extradition act must follow the rules of procedure in the Criminal Procedure Act," he continues. The state also states that there is no petition for extradition to the United States, as Snowden's lawsuit claims. Prosecutor Halvard Helle, who is leading the case on behalf of Snowden, disagrees with the State's approach. “The lawsuit is directed against the Ministry of Justice's exercise of authority, and we believe there is full opportunity to bring legal action on that basis. This is about controlling the
decision, and it has nothing to do with the prosecuting authority or criminal proceedings at all, "Helle explains to Ny Tid. He also believes it is wrong that there is no request for extradition from the United States. "There is a specific note from the Americans asking for arrest and imprisonment with a view to extradition to the United States," he said. Such a note is to be regarded as a request for extradition under the Extradition Act, according to Helle.

"It will break with the best in Norwegian tradition to refuse a person to receive an important award here, because we are afraid of the reactions of a great power."

«Martial law clause. " Snowden's concerns about being extradited to the United States are well founded. Other US whistleblowers have been subjected to harsh sanctions in recent years. An example is Chelsea Manning, who was severely degraded in custody and currently serving a 35-year sentence for alleged leakage of war documents in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as US embassy documents. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is one of several key US politicians who have denounced Snowden as guilty after the indictment, despite the fact that there is no enforceable verdict in the case. "The US government and Obama's regime relate to the so-called Espionage Act, which dates from as far back as World War I, ”explains Nygaard. “This is a martial law clause that does not give the right to normal legal assistance or defense. This law is serious, because it provides imprisonment for almost life in a high-risk prison with detention conditions that we in Norway can hardly imagine. ”

This is the second time Snowden is asking for free leasing to Norway to receive a prize. Last year he was awarded the Bjørnson Prize, but without the necessary guarantees from the Norwegian state, the prize was handed out with an empty chair in the hall and Snowden on video from Moscow. Last year, the Norwegian state also failed to take a position on the issue. "At the time, the law firm Schjødt prepared a report that clearly concluded that this is a political offense and that extradition is therefore excluded both under the Norwegian Extradition Act and the extradition treaty between Norway and the United States," says Helle. Nygaard believes Snowden's lawsuit follows from the ministry's position in last year's case. "The answer given last year was that this must be tried in court, and that's what we're doing now," Nygaard says. “When the state is now trying to make a legal process impossible by taking the steps they are doing in response, it is as much a political as a legal failure to act. It's serious.»

Politically inflamed. Norwegian PEN's goal is for the award ceremony and the lawsuit to help put whistleblowing on the agenda, and in the long run improve conditions for Norwegian whistleblowers as well. "It will be an important precedent if Snowden's lawsuit wins," says Nygaard. "It will be a safeguard of the framework for whistleblowers in general, and will affect both the practice and design of Norwegian as international legislation with regard to whistleblowers." Nygaard also hopes that the award will lead to a renewed debate on monitoring nationally and internationally. "There is a clear need to raise this as an international debate. Here, the parties should have common interests, "says Nygaard. The topic is particularly relevant following the Government's proposal to give the police permission to use new and highly intrusive surveillance methods.

Bård Vegard Solhjell (SV) supports the demand to give Snowden a free lease to Norway to receive the Ossietzy award. "Norwegian authorities must ensure that Snowden can come to Norway and receive the award as a safe man, and leave the country as a free man," Solhjell told Ny Tid. "It will break with the best in Norwegian tradition to refuse a person to receive an important award here, because we are afraid of the reactions of a great power." Potentially, Snowden's lawsuit could become an inflamed case in Norway's relationship with the United States. Norway is in fact also a member of the second innermost circle of information exchange between the intelligence services, the so-called nine eyes. Ny Tid asks Helle whether the Ministry of Justice has the opportunity to override the protection of whistleblowers that are in the legislation, if fundamental national or foreign policy interests are at stake. "Absolutely not. The basis for the lawsuit is the provisions of the Extradition Act §5, which excludes extradition to other states as long as there are alleged offenses of a political nature, "Helle states.

Can Snowden rely on Norway? In a questioning session in the parliament in the autumn of 2013, Prime Minister Erna Solberg denied that Snowden could be called a whistleblower. According to Solberg, Snowden should have used internal channels for notification. These are the same channels former Pentagon Deputy Inspector General John Crane recently revealed major problems with. According to Crane, who appeared on the news program Democracy Now! In late May, the US Department of Defense has a history of alerting whistleblowers to a history of punishing internal whistleblowers, revealing their identities, and downplaying the crippling conditions being notified.

The public prosecutor argues that Snowden must be in Norway before it can be decided in court whether extradition can take place. According to Nygaard, this is not good enough for Snowden. "It is obvious that the state will act decisively in this case, so there must be basic guarantees that extradition will not take place. This is a case with great personal risk for the whistleblower Snowden. The law has not been interpreted before. Therefore, a determination judgment is needed, "says Nygaard. "The government will mobilize with legal action to prevent this from becoming a lawsuit. Unfortunately, that was not surprising. But we believe it will be democratically self-censoring and very unfortunate if this case is not tried in court. "

 

Tori Aarseth
Tori Aarseth
Aarseth is a political scientist and a regular journalist at Ny Tid.

You may also like