top of page

Want to buy cannabis in store?

On April 20, 2024, ARODs cannabis cafe opens in Oslo. We do this because the UN human rights apparatus recommends legalization of the cannabis market to protect against the side-effects of prohibition, because more and more countries regulate the cannabis trade to protect public health and because the Norwegian government continues punishment on rejected premises. ​

Cannabis and the rule of law ​

The latter is punishable. The state has a duty to provide effective minority protection, but Norway has failed the responsibility for persecuted groups for 15 years. Supply and demand are turned into a victim and abuser context for budgets, powers, and prestige to be continued – and because the government's recently established Drug Policy Enforcement Commission ignores critical issues and the Director of Public Prosecutions has not acted on his constitutional responsibility, ARODs cannabis cafe will promote the rule of law. ​

For protection against the criminal market, we will offer quality assured goods in a safe environment and defend the ground on constitutional terms. We will offer a small piece of Norway, as the Constitution proposes, and not give up until the courts have ruled on the question of a legitimate purpose. ​

200 years of legal history is at stake and the need for legal development is obvious. To the extent that a regulated drug market is better than a criminal market, the prohibition does not fulfil a legitimate purpose, and the government's drug policy violates human rights.

Through civil disobedience, AROD has tried to shed light on this blind spot, but we have not heard from the police. AROD therefore invites to court proceedings and the Director of Public Prosecutions has an independent responsibility for the rule of law. ​

The Director of Public Prosecutions' responsibility

Since the Criminal Law Commission's report in 2002, the basis for Norwegian drug policy has become increasingly contested. Several commissioned studies confirm the lack of foundation for punishment, but the government's policy remains defined by the moral panic that was noted by the 2019 report of the Royal Drug Policy Commission.

The Director of Public Prosecutions must therefore emphasize principles that must weigh heavily if a liberal rule of law is to survive, and the 2023 report of the Committee for conduct, integrity, and conflict of interest in law enforcement's discussion of a conflict between administrative law and rights law, where the latter has been de-prioritised, reveals a systemic problem. ​

To the extent that the administrative law has been prioritised, drug policy has a problem with human rights, and AROD has shown the link between drug policy and the arbitrary persecution of the past. The Director of Public Prosecutions has a leadership responsibility for securing law and justice, and this list of questions to the Justice Minister reveals the constitutional dispute associated with drug policy. It also shows that the Supreme Court's rights analysis does not meet the requirements for impartial and competent treatment, and the Director of Public Prosecutions must secure the rule of law. ​

This is done by a dignified performance from the police in connection with the opening of Norway's first cannabis cafe, followed by a proper legal process. The Director of Public Prosecutions is aware that AROD has no production capacity and that we need to go to the illegal market to find goods. We will look for cannabis that is locally produced and quality controlled, and any interference from the police before the opening on April 20th will be obstructing a political program.

Actions like this are entitled to special protection, and we invite the police to show up between 10am -12am on the opening day.​ AROD will then have a special offer where cannabis is sold for 100 kroner per gram as far as the stock goes. The event will be documented, so there is no danger of forfeiture of evidence, and AROD offers the following list of evidence and court proceedings:

Preliminary list of evidence and legal course ​

For a proper legal process, a large trial chamber and streaming of the negotiations are desired. ​ The following list of evidence shall ensure constitutional protection: ​

Day 1: opening procedures and display of Moving a Nation Forward.

The documentary Moving a Nation Forward shows how Norway has for 60 years continued the drug prohibition on failing premises. For 15 years, the state has failed responsibility for persecuted groups, and the negotiations are based on the information that emerges.

To the extent that the prosecuting authority, the government, or the Ministry of Justice has any issues with the documentary, AROD will be informed in advance so that the evidence- and witness list can be updated. We do not want to waste the time of the court. However, it is the responsibility of the court to clarify whether the drug policy is associated with the arbitrary persecution of the past, and if the prosecuting authority, the Ministry of Justice, or the Prime Minister's office oppose such a connection, the witness box will clarify whether the government’s objections have any merit. ​

If the state rejects the claims stated in the documentary, AROD will present three more films that confirm the overall picture. We will return to this, but the claims of rights violations are so well documented that instructions and guidelines dictate that the prosecuting authority supports the demand that those responsible for punishment must testify. This will clarify the principal terrain associated with the drug policy, and the questions to the Justice Minister must be answered in order for punishment to continue.If the prosecution authority has objections to the legal issues, AROD will be informed in advance so that we can elaborate.​

The question list is otherwise extensive. It shows that the Storting, the Government, and the Ministry of Justice have failed the professional responsibility for the drug policy for 20 years, and sound judgment dictates that the prosecuting authority stand by the constitution.

This means that the prosecuting authority acknowledges (1) the connection between the drug policy and the arbitrary persecution of the past, (2) that the integrity of the legal profession – indeed the entire system – decrees a thorough review, and (3) that the Minister of Justice's response to questions determines the weight of the Constitution and whether the Accountability Act applies. ​

Witnesses ​

The defense has 3-20 witnesses, depending on the objections that are stated. If the prosecuting authority denies the connection to the arbitrary persecution of the past, we will summon the Director of Public Prosecutions and First State Attorney Runar Torgersen as witnesses. In any case, the Minister of Justice is witness 1, and to the extent that the Ministry of Justice opposes the connection to the current persecution of the past, we will summon more employees. ​

Nora Bergsjø, acting advisory at the Law Department, is nevertheless witness 2. She will explain the Justice Department’s perspectives on the drug policy after the Minister of Justice has explained the government's position. If the Ministry of Justice/Bergsjø does not acknowledge the connection to the current persecution of the past, the Defense will summon the Ministry Council Heidi Heggenes, as well as Kjetil Moen and Marlis Eichholz at the Law Department. They can elaborate on how the Ministry of Justice has taken care of responsibility, and if the Ministry's management does not acknowledge the connection to the current persecution, the Defense will summon Jens Andenæs, Hans-Petter Jahre, Tonje Vang, and Arnulf Øyen. ​

As members of the Drug Policy Enforcement Committee and the Government's academic alibi, these lawyers may elaborate on the basis for the government's policy. Although more and more countries regulate cannabis to protect public health and the UN human rights apparatus recommends legalization to protect society, the government continues to punish on rejected premises. This imposes a constitutional problem on the government and witness 3, regardless of Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. ​

Witnesses from the police can confirm that they have sources in the Labor Party who claim that Støre supported drug policy reform but gave in to the punishment lobby. The Prime Minister's testimony can be expected to shed light on a major systemic problem, and on this basis the court can determine the integrity of the political process. ​

If the Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, the government, or the Justice Department does not acknowledge the connection to the arbitrary persecution of the past, the defense will summon Mads Andenæs, Hans Petter Rui, Henriette Sinding Aasen, Hans Fredrik Marthinussen, Bård Dyrdal, Kathrine Holter, Tania Garthus, and Morten Holmbo. If the prosecuting authority does not acknowledge the connection to the current persecution of the past, we will summon the same witnesses, and they will offer insight from the perspective of professionals. ​

The number of days in court is thus determined by the objections that are stated. The police must find out if the actors of the case oppose a connection between the drug policy and the arbitrary persecution of the past, and then the days for court proceedings are calculated. ​

The question list is extensive, and each testimony will take about one day. There may be as much as 22 days in court, but the prosecution allocates 60 days to convict drug dealers to the most severe punishment of the law, and we are talking about a courtroom to decide the most important constitutional issues of the postwar era. The principle of equality dictates that the persecuted in the drug policy receive a worthy defense, and in the worst case, 22 days are what it takes to clarify the relationship with the Constitution. ​

Truth and reconciliation ​

Now the connection to the arbitrary persecution of the past is easy to uncover. Neither the Government, the Ministry of Justice, nor the Director of Public Prosecutions is served by opposing an effective remedy, and it is possible that they will all support an end to the hunt for scapegoats. In that case, the number of legal days can be reduced to five, and from there an independent impartial, and competent tribunal can address a national trauma by delivering a judgment confirming the defense's claims. ​

Such a judgment would mark that public panic no longer prevails, provide the persecuted groups with an effective remedy, and become a cornerstone for the construction of integrity in the legal system. It will force the Storting, Government, and the Justice Department to deal with significant deficiencies and prepare the way of a truth and reconciliation commission.

ARODS cannabis cafe will make possible all this. It will ensure that Norway accepts long ignored human rights responsibilities, and it is hard to imagine that the Director of Public Prosecutions does not want to end the increasing uncertainty among the police. ​ We are therefore looking forward to this year’s 420-celebration and hope to see positive interaction with the Norwegian police and prosecuting authority.

bottom of page