It is our unconscious and ignorant politicians who have created such a system. Pursuant to Section 49 of the Constitution (Grunnloven), the Storting could have enacted laws containing genuine control mechanisms for situations in which the state undertakes something as fundamentally serious as destroying biological ties. In other countries, such deliberate destruction of biological ties would immediately be brought before a genuinely independent court. Not so in Norway.

The fox guarding the henhouse

First, the case must be brought before the so-called Child Welfare Tribunal (barnevernsnemnda), whose chair is employed by the child welfare service’s superior authority, and whose expert tribunal member is approved by that same authority pursuant to Section 14-2 of the Child Welfare Act (barnevernsloven). Any expert assessment must also be approved by the Norwegian Child Expert Commission (Barnesakkyndig kommisjon), appointed by the same authority within the ministry. Time then passes, the child has been placed in emergency care and must adapt to the new situation. A further move is planned by the child welfare service from the temporary emergency foster home to a permanent foster home. This has become a separate and rapidly growing industry with an annual turnover of more than NOK 20 billion.

Career path

In Norway, the career path for judges generally passes through public positions in the state and municipal administration.
It is the highest executive authority, the Government, that appoints judges. Norway is the only democratic country with such a system. This results in a pronounced loyalty within the judiciary towards the state. In addition, pursuant to Section 36-4(1) of the Dispute Act (tvisteloven), the expert lay judge is a professional expert. And it is the state, the executive branch, that determines who may serve as such an expert judge, cf. Section 36-4(2)!

In this way, the executive branch secures support within the courts. The District Court consists of three judges: a professional judge whose career has been within the executive branch and who is appointed by the executive branch, an expert judge approved by the executive branch, and the third member, who is in reality the only independent one, elected by the local municipal council.

Loses in Strasbourg

It is therefore no surprise that Norway loses a large number of child welfare cases before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

The autocratic system devotes enormous resources to concealing these circumstances. But the ECtHR cannot interfere with or point out the systematic abuse of power taking place in Norway when this is how our elected representatives want it to be.

Following an emergency care order adopted by the local child welfare service, the children are systematically manipulated, and every effort is made afterwards to obscure the facts. In practice, it takes about a year before the emergency order reaches the courts.

To remedy this abuse of power, one government after another chooses instead to pump more oil in order to finance the employment of even more child welfare bureaucrats.

Power corrupts

Our constitutional founders already ensured a separation of powers into executive, legislative and judicial branches. As is well known, power corrupts, and no one is willing to establish genuine judicial independence in Norway.

Erik Bryn Tvedt, lawyer with 45 years of experience in child welfare cases