fredag 6. oktober 2017

No. 1605: Today's business was sentenced in all courts in Norway, but won and got a complete victory over the Norwegian state in the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg!

No. 1605:
Today's business was sentenced in all courts in Norway, but won and got a complete victory over the Norwegian state in the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg!
The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has ruled that the Norwegian state violated the freedom of speech when they called a DN journalist witnessing a criminal case. The journalist refused to explain and had to pay a fine of 30,000 kroner. Now Norway has to repay the sum.

The Human Rights Court finds that three Norwegian judicial authorities were wrong: Dagens Næringsliv journalist is not obliged to tell who was the source of a ten-year-old news affair.
"This is an incredibly important day for the source and freedom of speech," says Digital Cecilie Langum Becker in Today's Business.
In August 2007, Becker, who was a journalist at the time, wrote the news "Fearing that DNO raked".

The article was central to investigating an investor in the company in 2010, and Økokrim demanded that Becker should tell who her source was in the case and explain the dialogue she had with him.
In interrogation with Økokrim, both the DN journalist and then editor of DN Nye Media, Svein-Thore Gran, refused to comply with the wishes of the agency and invoked the source protection.

Source protection in front of diploma

For almost six years, the case has been on the European Court of Human Rights (EMD) in Strasbourg. But on Thursday morning it became known that the Norwegian state was wrong.

- I wholeheartedly agree that there has been a violation of Article 10 in this case, Judge Nona Tsotsoria writes in an attachment to the verdict.

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights is about freedom of expression.

Tsotsoria also notes that she finds it difficult to understand the rationality of the Norwegian courts' proposed division of section 10 of the Human Rights Act, on the protection of journalists who have been assisted by unknown persons who have appeared during the investigation.

"Such an argument does not arise from the case law or the circumstances surrounding this case, she writes.

The EMD orders the Norwegian authorities to repay the boat of NOK 30,000, which Becker was charged with not renouncing its sources.

- A correct and important judgment for the source protection. If the judgment in Norway had been standing, it would have been to eradicate the source protection. We have never commented on what sources we had in that case, and this ruling states that we had the full right to leave, "says Kjetil B. Alstadheim, political editor in DN.

Journalism uses the source protection to protect the identity of sources that provide information and information that has a social justification.

- Perceived almost unreal

Dagens Næringsliv appealed the case through all the three Norwegian judicial authorities, and decided in 2011 to bring the case to the European Court of Human Rights when the Supreme Court would not take the appeal of the DN.

The majority of Supreme Court judges said the source was not applicable when it was clear who the source was. The accused investor explained that it was he who sent the letter as the article was built by fax.

- The Human Rights Court also makes a point that whether or not Becker explained, would not have anything to say for the matter itself. The prosecutor said that they had enough evidence that the court could decide on it. It appears as a completely unnecessary and dangerous attack on the source, "says Alstadheim.
State Attorney Henrik Horn in Økokrim tells DN that they are aware of the verdict. He does not want to comment on Becker's statement about Økokrim's pressure against her.

"The case has been the subject of written treatment in the EMD, and it is correct that the process down there has taken a long time," he says.
(quote ending).

It's the same thing I've experienced, but it ultimately paid off to fight what the court in Norway has come to.
Think there are very good opportunities for me to experience the same!

Notice that the Norwegian state acts arrogantly, from above and adds its own legislation. The same thing they have done in the case against me and the heavenly blog.

Today's business journalist, like me, was convicted in Oslo District Court and Borgarting Court of Appeal and the case was rejected by the Norwegian Supreme Court. She received a fine of $ 30,000 which she now gets back. I have posted about50,000, - kr which I will receive again when we win over the Norwegian state.

1.)    Pray that the appeal goes through the dear faithfulness.

2.)    That we win and I am acquitted and the Norwegian state must acknowledge that they have been fooled by the psychopath and the narrator Jan Aage Torp. In 3 courts.

3.)    You can still participate in the support: Here is the account number in DNB: 0535 06 05 845

Related links:

Ingen kommentarer:

Legg inn en kommentar