Letter to The Human Rights Directorate about the ongoing Human Rights violations in Norway

Har du meninger? Send oss din mening. Følg oss på Facebook

Sadly, I have lost my faith in the European Court of Human Rights and the Committee of Ministers, and I adress the reason why in this letter to the DGI Human Rights Directorate.

Att: DGI Human Rights Directorate

Copy: Public.

Dear Sir/ Madam,

Subject: The ongoing Human Rights violations in Norway.

The Court and the Committee of Ministers have failed to protect the victims who already have won their cases.

Its time to conclude from the 15 first judgments against Norway in child welfare cases since September 2018, and the fasit is indeed discouraging:

The Judgments have lead to absolutely no positive development for the victims and the Norwegian courts, including the Supreme court, refuse to re-open the cases where the Court has found violations of Article 8 of the Convention.

The most precise statement concerning this fight with the Norwegian authorities, came from the judges GROZEV, O’LEARY AND HÜSEYNOV in their closing remarks in the chamber judgment in the Lobben- case:

“… In addition, the Court’s general principles when read in the abstract risk providing false hopes of reunification which, as this case demonstrates, are unlikely to be fulfilled once a child has been taken

into care, access rights have been significantly limited, time has passed and domestic proceedings formally meet Article 8 procedural standards.”

– Sadly, they could not be more right, because that is exactly what happens: These cases clearly demonstrate false hopes of reunification which are unlikely to be fulfilled once a child has been taken into care, access rights have been significantly limited and time has passed.

– Sadly, Norway’s cynical policy in these cases have prevailed and the victims have lost in great contrasts to the original intentions of the founding fathers of the Convention.

A careful examination of the travaux préparatoires for what is today Article 41 (former Article 50) reveals the original intentions of the founding fathers of the Convention.

The original version of the Article presented on 5 September 1949 by P.-H.

Teitgen reads as follows:

“The verdict of the [European] Court [of Human Rights] shall order the State concerned:

(1) to annul, suspend or amend the incriminating decision;

(2) to make reparation for damage caused;

(3) to require the appropriate penal, administrative or civil sanctions to be applied to the person or persons responsible.”

I have spoken to most of the victims where the Court has found violations of Article 8 of the Convention by Norway in child welfare cases, and the conclusion is clear:

The victims have given up justice, as the Norwwgian authorities constantly ignore to abide by the judgments and its consequences, and the Committee of Ministers are doing nothing to pursue their justice.

Let’s take the Lobben case in the Grand Chamber as an example:

It is obvious that the Grand Chamber, on 10 September 2019, found a violation of both applicants with regard to the the authorities refusal to lift the public care order, the decision to remove the first applicant’s parental responsibilities and to authorize adoption.

But, 33 months after the release of the GC-judgment, NOTHING has been done by the government or the judiciary to reunite mother and child.

Now, 13 years after the care order should have been lifted according to the Grand Chamber, Norway continues to violate the human rights by refusing to reunite mother and child. And the same happens in the other cases, where Norway was found to have violated the Convention.

I also remind about the general principles of restituto in integrum, which is the primary aim of Article 46 of the Convention, see inter alia the Grand Chamber Judgment, Mammadov v Azerbaijan, premise 191 and 192.

The Grand Chamber expressed these very important words:

«191. It follows from well-established case-law under Article 46 of the Convention that the State must take individual measures in its domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found by the Court and to redress its effects.

The aim is to put the applicant, as far as possible, in the position he would have been in had the requirements of the Convention not been disregarded.

In exercising their choice of individual measures, the Government must bear in mind their primary aim of achieving restitutio in integrum (see paragraphs 150-151 above).”

Recapitulation:

When people see that Norway can continue to violate the rights under the Convention, even after a Grand Chamber Judgment without any consequences from the international society, people lose confidence in the role of the European Court, and lose confidence in the principle of justice in

general.

Who wants to spend years trying to achieve some justice in the Court, when the only thing you really can achieve is a compensation of 25 000 Euro which not even cover the real costs of the cases?

My advise forward, will therefore be for people who experience violations from this system to flee the country, before the children are being put into public care.

Sadly, the Court and the Committee of Ministers have failed its mission to provide justice for these victims.

2 June, Bergen, Norway

Marius Reikeras

Comments

comments

Har du meninger? Send oss din mening. Følg oss på Facebook

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Epostadressen din vil ikke vises.


*