16 June 2021
The Demise of Viking and Laval
In Viking and Laval, the ECJ reduced the right of trade unions to take collective action and made it subject to the requirements of the four freedoms, effectively undermining its recognition as a fundamental right according to EU law. This sent shockwaves through the trade unions of Europe. In its recent Holship ruling, the ECtHR has challenged this, with potentially wide-reaching implications for the relationship between the human rights and EU fundamental freedoms, seen from the perspective of Strasbourg. Continue reading >>
1 
13 May 2021
WEBINAR 2: “Democracy and Disruption”
How has democracy been impacted by over a year of pandemic response and emergency? How have states ensured the democratic accountability of their actions in response to the global health emergency? What lessons can be learned for now, and for the future? This panel examines democratic practices, and highlights the best – and most concerning – developments. Continue reading >>
0
16 April 2021
The Norwegian Pandemic Response
One year into the pandemic it is necessary to take stock of what has been achieved by the measures that have been implemented, and to reflect on their costs. Phrased differently, how successful have the authorities been in their endeavors to contain and control the spread of COVID-19? And from a legal point of view, what are the constitutional and cultural legacies of a year of deploying war-like measures against the virus? In this contribution to the symposium, I revisit the Norwegian COVID-19 response. In particular, I begin to unpack the narrative of success and its impact on deliberative democratic discourse. I do this by way of taking stock of the response through the lens of three rule of law indicators, namely the application of the principle of legality, the degree of parliamentary control, and adherence to open and democratic principles of rule-making. Continue reading >>02 March 2021
The Pomp of Popular Constitutional Outrage
In January 2021, the Norwegian government decided to circulate a proposal for formally adding a curfew clause to the Act Relating to the Control of Communicable Diseases from 1994. The public reacted with an extraordinary expression of popular engagement and outrage. On 17 February 2021, in the face of strong public, commercial and political opposition, the proposal was shelved by the government. This case may show something both about the level of trust between the authorities and the public in Norway, and the reactions when one of the parties is perceived to break the “social contract” that is embedded in this relationship. Continue reading >>
0
02 December 2020
A New Nail in the Coffin for the 2017 Polish Judicial Reform
On 1 December the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR gave an important ruling that may have wide-reaching implications for the ongoing attempts to curb the rule of law backsliding in Poland and other countries. The case addresses the appointment of judges, and the way this affects the status of a court as a “tribunal established by law” in the meaning of Article 6 of the ECHR. Continue reading >>26 November 2020
Dissimilar Similarities
In the EU, most attention is paid to the judicial reforms underway in Hungary and Poland, which threaten judicial independence and the rule of law. The concurrent judicial reforms in Norway and Slovakia have received almost no attention. Although quite dissimilar to the former set, the latter underscore that institutional reforms cannot be viewed apart from their social and political settings. Continue reading >>13 April 2020
Fighting the Virus and the Rule of Law – A Country Report on Norway
Governments across Europe are quick to limit personal freedoms in the name of fighting the pandemic. The case of Norway, however, reveals how the process of adopting these measures can compromise democratic discourse and procedure. The main rule of law challenges we have seen here are an overreach of the authorities of their legal powers, a lack of transparency and exclusion of the public from public decision-making and battle over jurisdiction to regulate between the central government and local authorities. In the end, it is not just our health, but the rule of law that is under threat. Continue reading >>
0
23 November 2019
The Battle for Jurisdiction over Hong Kong
Beijing's reaction to the Hong Kong High Court's judgment regarding the constitutionality of the face-mask ban is eerily similar of the approach taken by the German Reichskommissar against the Norwegian Supreme Court during the German occupation of Norway in 1940. Continue reading >>14 November 2019
The Impossibility of Upholding the Rule of Law When You Don’t Know the Rules of the Law
On October 28 2019, it became known that the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration has been systematically breaching the rule of law for years when it applied the EEA legislation incorrectly in cases of unemployment and sickness benefits and work assessment allowances. According to the Attorney General, at least 48 people have been wrongly convicted of social security fraud, 36 of whom have been sentenced to prison. Later investigations have revealed that the number is much higher. This blatant disregard of the rule of law illustrates what happens when political pressure meets legal professionals, judges and an administration who are blissfully ignorant when it comes to European law. Continue reading >>
0