In addition to the Conservatives, the NRK has asked several members of Storting’s Judicial Council about the new arrest warrant agreement.
Overall, respondents agree that the new arrest warrant agreement is a useful tool for Norwegian police in the fight against cross-border crime.
Andreas Szalk Unnaland, Justice Policy Spokesman for SV, Norway believes that it is in Norway’s interest to make agreements with other countries regarding the deportation of persons involved in criminal activities.
– At the same time, many personal cases show that the law can be wrong, and one must pay close attention to how the law challenges the legal protection of the people. It is challenging if the arrest warrant law is used in our view to be suspected of being less serious or used to search for offenders. In such cases we need to see what room there is for Norway to maneuver to take care of its own citizens.
Labor Party Justice Policy Spokeswoman Maria Assen-Svensrut Indicates that the contract involves shorter case processing time and simplified procedures compared to normal assignment.
– In some cases, deportation to Norway or from there may take more than a year, during which time the wanted person is often detained. Being a party to the Norwegian agreement also prevents Norway from becoming a free port for criminals from the EU.
Aasen Svensrud The agreement also places confidence in the EU’s legal framework and is based on the principle of mutual recognition of court rulings in other states.
– Norwegian authorities should therefore not decide whether a criminal sentence is appropriate or whether there is good reason to suspect a criminal offense. At the same time, the arrest warrant law states that surrender must not take place in violation of international law, including the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It is a safety valve that is brought forward in a situation where an EU government cannot ensure a fair trial.
Liberal Party Justice Policy Spokesman, Invild Wetrus DorswickAmong other things, the advantage of the agreement is that it significantly simplifies the process of transferring persons between Norway and the member states.
At the same time, Torswick points out that as a result of the agreement, we accept extradition to EU countries that perform worse than us. An example of something from Spain.
Torswick also believes that Norway should play an active role in highlighting the challenges in the agreement, in a network of European judicial councils with Norwegian observer status.
– But of course we could have achieved more in this area if Norway had been a member of the European Union.
Conservative Justice Policy Spokeswoman Schweinsteinsland He believes it is important for the Norwegian police to have the necessary tools to combat cross-border crime. He thinks it would be useful to remind Norwegians abroad that the laws of the country in which they travel apply.
Stensland also agrees that parts of the new law may be debated.
– If something goes wrong in Norway, the Spaniard living in Spain will be sent to Norway. So it provides protection in both ways. But we already see that some of these cases are very bad for those involved. They often suspect something, but are not convicted of a crime and sit back and wait. So the rule of law is not as good in all European countries as it is in Norway, it turns out.
Representatives of the Center Party and the FRP on Sporting’s judicial panel did not respond to NRK’s inquiries.