BREV TIL HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL.

NORWAY celebrates today its Constitution, but human rights are non-existent for Norwegian citizens.
Specifically, I want to get the attention to biological parents and their children, who find that at any time the risk that the child accompanied by police breaking into your homes and violate the Constitution § 102, which clearly states: House inquisitions shall not find place without the criminal case.
Norway launched the 13/02/2011 its new website barnevernet.no, in real socialist-communist-fascist spirit elaborates the their desire that most do the most harm to its neighbor, informer society, taking its next where it hurts you might say.

It says nothing about the false denunciation shall be punished with. So now it’ll probably be free for everyone to review the members of the Jewish community who circumcise their male children, because they do not like religion. Revenge, they will think. The small positive is that specify cherish supposedly required to county appeal board.

“Thou shalt not bear false witness against your next”, says G-d’s Law. Human laws do not take such petty considerations, especially the socialist.

In Norway there is bipartisan agreement on the Marxist socialist system that was practiced under Lenin and Stalin and the communist Soviet Union and East Germany (DDR), as in the Nazi National Socialist Federal Republic of Germany. Socialism everywhere whether it is international or just national.

This is nothing new in this country that politics is like that. Has been so for å century

Even in the simplest criminal cases is the rule of law guarantee considerably better than in severe child care.

In child care are lacking complete rules for the collection of information.

The procedure is performed as follows -

The individual child welfare worker decides freely on conversations with constituents taken over the phone or in person.

Largely used phone.

The interrogated been held no rights nor the possible consequences of the case.

Often it is not even mentioned that the information given will be written down and used in the case. One can not read out what the officer writes down, and the information is often recorded without being asked a single control issues.

The information collected, written down in a way that seems to Voere of highly subjective nature, characterized by each executive officer’s opinion.

The information is often largely sorted out what the individual officer considers to Voere relevant.

In child care buildings often on other, third-and fourth-hand information and not infrequently on anonymous messages.

Anonymous messages are impossible to defend against

County Board has jurisdiction, but is not subject to the same rules as the courts.

    The courts are governed by the Ministry of Justice. County board under the Ministry of Children and Equality, BLD.

    In addition, controls BLD also Bufetat, Bufdir and county governors.

    According to human rights should people have a fair case, and the case shall Voere open to inspection.

    County committees are closed and locked, nothing dictated or recorded. The board chair often leads protocol itself, and the minutes are for “the manager’s head.”

    The press does not have access to the cases of the County Board, in regular courts get press access in sentences (anonymous), and they can follow most cases “live”

    (Although journalists can get confidentiality for hubs and other identifiable information).

    County board is closed and locked.

    The County Board will commission manager issues a few weeks before the case starts, “judges” are case handed over 30-60 minutes before the case starts.

    In reality, this means that the board’s chairperson may brush the matter on the manager’s desired direction, then the other is unable to read through hundreds of pages of documents.

    "Experts" are sacred cows, it is often psychologists who are commissioned to Voere expert. They serve as NOK 1000-2000 date. page they write, many lives of the task as an expert witness for child welfare / county board.

    The one day act as expert psychologist and the next day they Voere “professional judges” in the same county board in another case.

    It is neither the county board, manager or child protection frankly impartially, there is a clear conflict of interest and loyalty is often the system and colleagues than to those being “investigated”.

    County Board Chairman should Voere fixed term, “one bad apple” might otherwise be sitting forever and destroy the lives of many people.

    County Board should be closed and the ordinary judicial apparatus over, often with special judges.

    It is difficult to see the need for tribunals that do not even follow basic human rights

Norway is particularly good at pointing out violations of basic human rights, power and abuse of authority in several countries around the world, while often be completely covers of what Norwegian authorities themselves make use of similar offenses.

There are obviously many children protection that still live in the belief that their authority to conduct investigations in private homes and personal research, is identical with the powers held by police, prosecutors and courts. Where does child care completely wrong and we shall both prove and explain why.

Sfm.no has previously claimed that the child many times have undergone illegal to plant in service purposes by performing clean police tasks that the overhead is not authorized.

Sure enough, the child welfare law to conduct investigations by Child Welfare Act, but the right to an investigation in child directed, must in no way be confused with the right and authority such as the police, prosecution and the court has to initiate a house and personal examination. We first look at key sections of the Act relating to child welfare. Note in particular the Act unequivocal letter in § 4.3, 2 paragraph.

Child Welfare Act, Chapter 4
 
§ 4-3. The right and duty of child welfare services to conduct investigations.

        If there are reasonable grounds to believe that circumstances exist which can provide a basis for action under this section, the child welfare service must investigate the matter, cf deadlines contained in § 6-9.

        The study will be conducted so that the least possible damage to anyone affected, and it should not be more extensive than the purpose dictates. It should be emphasized to prevent information about the investigation being spread unnecessarily.

        The parents or the child lives with, can not oppose an investigation referred to in subsection being implemented by home visits.

§ 6-8. Use of force in carrying out investigations and the enforcement of decisions

        When necessary to child welfare administration require the assistance of the police to conduct investigations pursuant to § 4-3 and the enforcement of decisions under § § 4-6 second paragraph, 4-8, 4-9, 4-10, 4-11 4-12, 4-17, 4-24, 4-25, second paragraph, and 4-29.

Amended by Acts November 25, 1994 # 62, June 22, 2012 No. 34 (in force from August 1, 2012 pursuant to the Decree. June 22, 2012 # 610).

§ 6-9. Deadlines and imposition of fines.

        A survey by § 4-3 shall be carried out as soon as possible and within three months. In special circumstances, the time limit may be six months.

        An investigation is conducted when child welfare services have decided on measures or the case is decided dismissed. In cases where the measure falls under county social welfare board, considered the survey conducted when child welfare service has submitted a request for action to the County Board in accordance with § 7-11.

        Upon the expiry of the deadline the county governor may impose fines municipality. The same applies if the time limit mentioned in § 4-2. The Ministry may issue regulations on the implementation of the scheme and the size of the fine.
As stated in the Child Welfare Act § 6-8, 2 paragraph, it is also just the leader of Child Welfare who may require assistance from the police in exceptional cases, employees with lower rank and often total lack of competence.

Below we discuss the relevant articles of the Criminal Procedure Act, which applies to authorities with the right to conduct house searches and personal searchings. Pay special attention to what the Criminal Code § 197, 1.ledd say about permissions.


The Criminal Procedure Act, Chapter 15

§ 192 When someone with reasonable grounds suspected of an act which the law can result in imprisonment, and make a search of his residence, room or storage area to implement arrest or to search for evidence or for things that may be seized or that it can be encumbrance in.

       For others, the search warrant is made when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting such an action, and

1) the offense is committed or suspected detained there,
2) suspects have been there during the prosecution of the act or fresh tracks, or
3) it is otherwise reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects there may be arrested, or that there can be no proof or things that may be seized or that it can be freezing in.

Amended by Act of 11 June 1999 No. 39 (in force July 1, 1999 pursuant to the Decree. June 11, 1999 # 663).

§ 194 For suspected an act which by law is punishable by imprisonment for 8 years or more, and make a search of any house or room in a specified area if there is reason to believe that the offender may remain hidden in the area, or not there may be evidence or things that may be seized.

§ 195 When someone with reasonable grounds suspected of an act which the law can result in imprisonment, and make a search of his person if there is reason to believe that it can lead to the discovery of evidence or of things that can be seized or that it can be freezing in.

       For other than suspects may be made personally warrant when the suspicion for an act which by law is punishable by imprisonment of more than six months, and the particular circumstances speaks to carry out such search warrant.

Amended by Act of 11 June 1999 No. 39 (in force July 1, 1999 pursuant to the Decree. June 11, 1999 # 663).

§ 197 Without that person’s written consent search warrant by § § 192, 194 and 195 made only after a decision by the court.

       Is there a danger if you stay, the decision taken by the prosecution. In search of newspaper office or similar to such a decision made by the public prosecutor and only if it is probable that the investigation will be materially adversely affected if we were to wait for the court’s decision.

       The decision by the first and second paragraphs shall as far as possible be in writing and state the nature of the case, the purpose of the search and what it should include. An oral decision shall be recorded as soon as possible.

Amended by Act of 14 June 1985 No. 71, Act June 4, 1999 No. 37 (in force July 1, 1999 pursuant to the Decree. June 4, 1999 # 567).


The law must be followed

Community magazine is on this basis with a clear appeal to child welfare staff and those who perform services for the agency, whether here to follow the laws and rules that apply

Here we can refer to the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8, which deals with the right to respect for family life.
Law on strengthening human rights in Norwegian law (Human Rights Act).
The law is an implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Briefly, its provisions will prevail other provisions of Norwegian law. For example, if it turns out that a provision of the Children Act is in conflict with Article 8 of the Convention concerning the right to respect for private and family life.

Article 8 The right to respect for private and family life
1 Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2 There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others

It is startling information jurist Herman Berge now recently published.

 According to Berge sits over half the country’s 800 judges without valid papers judge!

Judgments of these judges will be complete invalid, ie so-called nulliteter as it is called in technical terms.

How many such invalid judgments rendered during the years can only be left to the imagination.

 

But even if the sentences are false and invalid as the consequence of the judging fair enough.

 

Our conception of law is thus a consistent ILLUSION based on an unimaginable number INVALID court decitions

Vist 503 ganger. Følges av 1 person.
Annonse

Nye bilder