Ref: Norway v. Breivik
Case: 11-188627 MED-05 P O Box 5042 George East, 6539 Cell: (071) 170 1954 29 June 2012
MinJustice: Grete Faremo P.O. Box 8005 Dep, 0030 Oslo Tel: 22 24 90 90 E: GFaremo (grete.faremo@jd.dep.no); Ch.Staff: Morten Ruud (morten.ruud@jd.dep.no); Admin: Hans Ostgaard (hans-olav.ostgaard@jd.dep.no); Comm: Gunnar Johansen (gunnar.johansen@jd.dep.no); Int Director: Tonje Meinich (tonje.meinich@jd.dep.no); Office (postmottak@jd.dep.no)
CC: B책rd Vegar Solhjell Minister of Environment The Ministry of the Environment P.O.Box 8013 Dep, N-0030 Oslo Tel: +47 22 24 57 01 | Fax: +47 22 24 60 34 E-mail: MinEnv (miljovernministeren@md.dep.no), Head of Comm: Jon Berg (jon.berg@md.dep.no), Sec.Gen: T Radahl (tom.radahl@md.dep.no); DirGen: H.Andenaes (hege.andenas@md.dep.no); DirGen: Jon Rorvik (jon.rorvik@md.dep.no)
CC: Environmental Appeals Board1: Appeals of environmental information E-mail: EnvAppBrd (post@miljoklagenemnda.no) Media Respondents: Aftenposten: (hilde.haugsgjerd@aftenposten.no); BTidende (trine.eilertsen@bt.no); Dagbladet (2400@db.no); NRK (hans-tore.bjerkaas@nrk.no); TV2 (alf.hildrum@tv2.no); VG (torry.pedersen@vg.no); Addresseavisen (arne.blix@adresseavisen.no)
Dear Minister Faremo, Request Clarification & Response: 1. Is there any Norwegian law that provides for discrimination of due process court or administrative procedures against Non-Norwegian citizens? 2. Do courts and administrative bodies in Norway totally shut down for Summer vacations? 3. Complaint: The Environmental Appeals Board appears to be refusing me access to its administrative due process complaint resolutionprocedures, and the Minister of Environment appears to approve such discrimination; 4. If your Administration is not their Supervisory Body, please provide contact details of whom exactly are their Supervisory Body/ies?
1
http://www.miljoklagenemnda.no/
29/06/12 Min of Justice: Grete Faremo www.norge-korrupsjon.blogspot.com
www.fleur-de-lis.co.nr
Complaint: Ministry of Environment: & Environmental Appeals Board Obstruction of Justice of my Complaint for Review of Request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) sent to Aftenposten, Bergens Tidende, Dagbladet, NRK, TV2, VG and Addresseavisen: RE: Censorship in Norway’s Media: (I) Media’s EnvironmentPopulation-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny On 25 May 2012, Requests for Access to Environment and Health Information were submitted to the editors of Aftenposten, Bergens Tidende, Dagbladet, NRK, TV2, VG and Addresseavisen requesting information related to their decision-making to censor information related to the (I) Media’s Environment-Population-Terrorism Connection; (II) Norway’s Stalinesque Political Psychiatry Tyranny. Each respondent was additionally provided a copy of the 22 April 2012 Earth Day: “If It Bleads, It Leads” Media’s Population-Terrorism Connection Report (42pgs). The Media Publications were requested to provide the requested information by 17:00 hrs on 11 June 2012. As of 17:00 hrs on 18 June 2012, but declined to do so. On 18 June 2012 a complaint was filed with the Environmental Appeals Board: Appeals of environmental information. On 22 June 2012, the Environmental Appeals Board responded that they had deleted the complaint without reading it. From: Post miljoklagenemnda [mailto:Post@miljoklagenemnda.no] Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 3:03 PM To: Habeus Mentem Subject: Ikke lest: Env. Appeals Brd: Appeal: RE: Addresseavisen | Aftenposten | BTidende | Dagbladet | NRK | TV2 | VG Meldingen Til: Post miljoklagenemnda Emne: Env. Appeals Brd: Appeal: RE: Addresseavisen | Aftenposten | BTidende | Dagbladet | NRK | TV2 | VG Sendt: 18. juni 2012 23:41:11 (UTC+01.00) Amsterdam, Berlin, Bern, Roma, Stockholm, Wien ble slettet uten å ha vært lest 22. juni 2012 15:02:32 (UTC+01.00) Amsterdam, Berlin, Bern, Roma, Stockholm, Wien.
No reasons have been provided by the Environment Appeals Board for their decision to delete my complaint, allegedly without reading it. Nor is it registered on their Inkomne Sake pages: “Saker til behandling nå” and neither on their Vedtak/Decisions page. On 25 June 2012 a complaint was filed to the Minister of Environment: Bård Vegar Solhjell requesting the Ministry to please inform me whether “the deletion was an error; or if not: written reasons for the deletion of my complaint.” On 25 June 2012 the Environmental Appeals Board (no name provided) responded. They did not apologize at all for the deletion of my complaint, nor did they provide written reasons for their decision. We hereby confirm the receipt of your inquiry. 29/06/12 Min of Justice: Grete Faremo www.norge-korrupsjon.blogspot.com
www.fleur-de-lis.co.nr
Reference no: 2012/708 - 1 Documentation Services, Records Management Climate and Pollution Agency E-mail: postmottak@klif.no Phone: + 47 22 57 34 00 - Fax: +47 22 67 67 06 Postboks 8100 Dep, 0032 Oslo (Strømsveien 96)
On 26 June 2012 I responded requesting clarification regarding the so-called Reference Number and why I had not been issued with a Case Number. Documentation Services, Records Management Climate and Pollution Agency E-mail: postmottak@klif.no Phone: + 47 22 57 34 00 - Fax: +47 22 67 67 06 Postboks 8100 Dep, 0032 Oslo (Strømsveien 96) RE: Env. Appeals Brd: Appeal: RE: Addresseavisen | Aftenposten | BTidende | Dagbladet | NRK | TV2 | VG This is rather unusual, in my experience. In South Africa if you submit a complaint to a court; you are given a Case Number for the case. If there is an error in the application, the court clerks inform you of the specific error that allegedly requires your correction. Yet you have provided a 'reference number for an inquiry', with no additional information or any reasons for not providing a court case number. Is "2012/708 - 1" the case number for my complaint? It does not appear so to me, since the case numbers of cases on your website are numbered differently; such as: Sak: 2012/1 Sak: 2011/3
Sak: 2011/5 Sak: 2011/1
Sak: 2011/4
There is already a case: Sak: 2012/1; so logically this would be Sak: 2012/2. Strangely, you have cases whose final decisions are not published: Sak: 2011/2 Sak: 2008/04
Sak: 2010/2 Sak: 2008/02
Sak: 2010/1 Sak: 2008/01
Could you please clarify what "2012/708 - 1" means, what the case number is to be; and your Norwegian court process for proceeding.
On 28 June 2012 the Environmental Appeals Board responded that they were on summer vacation and would only answer my questions after the summer vacation. Thank you for your inquiry. Unfortunately, we will not be able to answer your inquiry until after the summer vacation. We apologize for any inconvenience caused. Secretary for the Environmental Information Appeals Board, Climate and Pollution Agency E-mail: post@miljoklagenemnda.no Phone: + 47 22 57 34 00 - Fax: +47 22 67 67 06 Postboks 8100 Dep, 0032 Oslo (Strømsveien 96)
On 28 June 2012 I responded to enquire when exactly the summer vacation was ending? Dear Ms. Nameless (Is that so you can avoid being held accountable?) Secretary for the Environmental Information Appeals Board When exactly is the end of your summer vacation?
29/06/12 Min of Justice: Grete Faremo www.norge-korrupsjon.blogspot.com
www.fleur-de-lis.co.nr
On 28 June 2012 I contacted a friend in Norway to enquire whether this was standard policy procedure: I want your advice. I filed a few requests for environmental and health information to six of the largest NO media publications. They refused to provide me the information.. so I filed the request to the Environmental Appeals board. At first they deleted my complaint, until I filed a complaint to the Minister of Environment asking why my complaint was deleted. Then they refused to provide me with a case number, only an 'acknowledgement of inquiry' number. When I filed another complaint to the Ministry of Environment, the Environmental Appeals Board responded that they are on summer vacation and cannot provide me answers to my complaint, not even a case number until after the summer holidays. They have so far refused to say when their summer holidays ends. Can this be true? Not even in third world africa do courts shut down for christmas holidays; they have a skeleton staff who provide all the usual services. Are they just fucking me around; or is this true?
He responded: Perhaps the rules are different for non-residents. Perhaps you don't have the same rights to be answered as people living in Norway.
My response: "Perhaps the rules are different for non-residents. Perhaps you don't have the same rights to be answered as people living in Norway." If so, thats okay; but then that would be a statutary policy; and they can say 'according to such and such statute, you don't have the same rights as people in norway and we don't have to answer your complaints'. If there is no such statutory policy, and this policy is purely for me (cause they don't want to deal with the issues in my complaint) then its discrimination. I imagine from your answer you are implying that this court is not shutdown for summer vacation for Norwegians who file a complaint?
His response: I have no idea what the routines of Norwegian courts are vis-Ă -vis summer vacations. As for the courts administration not volunteering information to you that you have not specifically asked about you have experienced this previously, so you may have to ask whether you have diminished rights compared to Norwegian citizens or residents of Norway in order to get that clarified
Respectfully Submitted
Lara Johnstone Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity Norway Corruption | Norge Korrupsjon http://norge-korrupsjon.blogspot.com/
29/06/12 Min of Justice: Grete Faremo www.norge-korrupsjon.blogspot.com
www.fleur-de-lis.co.nr