“We are ready to accept almost any explanation of the present crisis in our civilisation except one: that the present state of the world may be the result of a serious mistake on our own part, and that the pursuit of some of our most cherished ideals has apparently produced results utterly different from those which we expected.”
(Friedrich A. von Hayek, The Road to Serfdom)
The news picture we experience daily is confusing. We see responsible people being brought before the courts, convicted and punished for trifles, while perpetrators of extreme violence walk free and receive protection from the authorities. What has happened to the image with which we grew up of Norway as one of the world’s best, safest and most upright countries, where “Uncle Policeman” never fails and always stands by us when required?
The need for a credible explanation grows almost daily as we are presented with the stories of obviously trustworthy citizens such as Vigdis Bollerud, Rodgeir Vinsrygg and Lillian Gran. It is beyond belief that these people, or others mentioned in connection with their activities, are serious criminal enemies of society from whom we must be protected with all the power the State can mobilise in defence of its citizens. What is it that has happened? Who stands behind it?
What is it that can lead to people in this country being imprisoned without there existing a judgement produced through an open legal process, in accordance with applicable law? Was this not precisely what was supposed to be the hallmark of the constitutional state governed by law of which we claim to be citizens? How is it possible that the obvious killing of a human being is not investigated and adjudicated as murder, but sought camouflaged as something it plainly is not? How is it possible that the police we have been taught to perceive as the very guarantor of our daily safety attacks a person who warns against breaches of law and regulations, while documented criminals are set free?
Regardless of whatever explanation the authorities may ultimately choose for such cases, today we stand with a clear understanding that what we believed to be incontrovertibly certain – that the mill of the rule of law, however slowly it grinds, will ultimately provide us with a credible explanation in all these questions and deliver judgements that we will recognise as correct and just. That is what we are waiting for, and our expectations of the ultimate victory of the constitutional state governed by law will not be fulfilled until that happens.
Legal certainty is not a simple concept. It has a multitude of variants and definitions, depending on cultural and political conditions in the world. When we ourselves claim to live in a constitutional state governed by law, it is clearly understood that we belong to the Western Christian civilisation which through centuries and more has developed a legal culture with clear maxims and principles reflected in our legislation, and in the entire constitutional culture and legal consciousness of our society.
The Rule of Law cannot tolerate arbitrariness in the administration of justice. This principle is the very foundation of our constitutional state governed by law, which throughout history we have fought wars to defend. Already in the Frostathing Law from the twelfth century it is established that: “With law shall the land be built, and not with lawlessness laid waste”. Therefore, we have arrived at a historical crossroads when doubt can be raised as to whether it is the law that governs and decides, or whether the state regime has grown and developed to a point where its own internal considerations, interests and purposes in some contexts have been given precedence over the justice which in an increasing number of cases strikes people who have nothing other than the facts of the case and the provisions of the law with which to defend themselves.
The continuation and the final conclusion of the cases that recently have brought this debate to the forefront will in a dramatic manner determine whether Norway can still call itself a constitutional state governed by law, or whether after 80 years of freedom and independence we must reassess the civilisational status of our country. If we have slumbered and in good faith entrusted the safeguarding of our legal certainty to people who have other considerations to safeguard, then we are jointly responsible for the predicament into which we have come.