The case was processed by the District Court on 1. June 2022. Arguing that the business of the court was to look at the law and not at the relationship to human rights, the Judge refused to let the defense present any witnesses, documentation, or documentary evidence in support of our claim that there is a connection between moral panic, human rights violations and the arbitrary persecution of the past.

​

• The decision of the District Court (Norwegian)

 

This decision has been sent to the Court of Appeals. The defence holds that the right to fair trial and effective remedy has been breached, that it takes a human rights analysis to decide whether punishment is just, and that the Court of Appeals must reject the decision of the District Court.

​

• The brief to the Court of Appeals (Norwegian)

​

On 26. October 2022, the Court of Appeals decided that the appeal was without merit, and that no further action should be taken by the court.

​​

• The decision of the Court of Appeals (Norwegian)

​

This decision has been appealed to the Supreme Court. The defense upholds that the right to a fair trial and effective remedy dictates that the evidence for human rights violations is accepted by the court, that a human rights analysis must be done, and that this is the only way to preserve the rule of law.

 

• Lawyer Lars Mathias Undheims brief to the Supreme Court (Norwegian)

• ARODs brief to the Supreme Court (Norwegian)

​

On 20. December 2022, the Norwegian Supreme Court failed to provide an effective remedy. The Judges accepted the reasoning of the appeals court, which held that it does not matter if the drug law violates human rights, and the case will be appealed to the European Court of Human Rights.

​

• The decision of the Supreme Court (Norwegian)

​

The prosecution, in claiming that "it is not the proper area of the court to consider whether the Nowegian drug policy is wise or fair as seen from a moral perspective", has rejected the weight of 200 years of legal development in the area of Norwegian human rights protection. AROD therefore has complained to the Director of the Police, the Director of Public Prosecutions, and the Standing Committee on Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs:

​

• AROD to the Director of the Police, 1 January 2023 (Norwegian)

• AROD to the Standing Committee on Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs (1 January 2023)

• Follow up to the Standing Committee on Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs (30 January 2023)

• Response from the Standing Committee on Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs (14 February 2023)

• AROD to the Standing Committee on Scrutiny and Constitutional Affairs (16 February 2023)

• AROD to the Director of Public Prosecutions, 8 February 2023 (Norwegian)

​

 

AROD REPORTS POSTER TO THE POLICE:

AROD has made a poster where the prosecutor in ARODs civil disobedience is being depicted as a traitor to the constitution. This campaign has split the drug reform community, and AROD has reported its own campaign to the police. As we do not condone hate-speech, we want to clarify the posistion for the rule of law and the use of language, and this is another opportunity for the Norwegian justice system to deliver on neglected promises:

​

• AROD to the Police 1 April 2023 (Norwegian)

​

As a result of this campaign, Sturla Henstiksbø, the prosecutor in ARODs civil disobedience, filed a complaint to the police. He charged that ARODs leader was showing ruthless behaviour and obstructing justice. However, the police and the the prosecution sided with AROD, and it is now clear that prosecutors must bear being called "quislings" if they fail to respect the right to judicial review:

​

• The opinion of the District Attorney (Norwegian) 

​

​