Jussprofessor Find Arnesen let in the day before the assessment about what has been termed as the Second largest rettsskandale. The committee should find out three things: How could the wrong practice be established , why did it take so long to discover it, and what we can learn.
In the work they have gone through 100 domsavgjørelser, 300 judgments in the Norwegian national insurance court, and they have talked with several of those affected. Committee chairman Arnesen describes them as very strong meetings.
the Report has also been thick. 323 pages including appendices, with a killing conclusion: All failed. Far back in time, all the way from Norway implemented the EEA agreement in 1994 - although the committee's minority disagree in the legal understanding and thus believe the bug started in 2012.
no Matter; everyone has made mistakes: the NAV, the ministry, the Norwegian national insurance court, the legislature, prosecutors and the courts. No one got me out the paradigm shift that the EEA agreement entailed, and that would lead to that EEA law had primacy of English law. It's like a kind of huge, unconscious conspiracy.– the System against the little man
Need to apologise is, of course, large with the most responsible parties, as with the prime minister, the former and current arbeidsministeren. Torbjørn Røe Isaksen received today the report, and repeated the regret with big, sad eyes. There is no reason to distrust the sincerity.
There are about over 4,000 people and 200 million, where "many people have had huge refund claims in an already difficult phase of life, and several have also served long prison sentences, there has not been a legal basis for", as it is hard and cash is named in the press release from utvalgssekretariatet.
the Eyes may be large and dreary now, but the manner in which the NAV and the responsible politicians actually sympathizes with the situation of those who were victims in this scandal, remains to be seen.
Now drawn up the new rules to find out how aktivitetsplikten should be observed for those who take sick leave, arbeidsavklaringspenger and pleiepenger to another EEA country.
Will the government tighten into aktivitetsplikten so much so that, in practice, preclude travel of the particular scope, or will you live the "spirit" of the EEA agreement? The purpose of the EEA-agreement is to facilitate the free movement and create an integrated Europe. The ability to take their social security as far as is practical and sensible, is a of course a part of this.
If the state tightens the most in, it will show that it first and foremost, it is sad that the rules were incorrectly used. Then it will appear that they are not sorry for what most significant: That the wrong rules were used to make life unnecessarily complicated in a society where people (when we don't find ourselves in a coronapandemi) live their lives more criss-crossing of borders.
Some of the reason to the suspicion that arises, is a finding of the report that utvalgslederen referred to during the presentation. Most cases have come to after 2016. It was then the NAV started to intensify the pursuit of what they believed were the unlawful recipients, by means of electronic tracks. Before the time the cases were primarily detected because the recipients broke the rules for obligation.Warned time and time again,
the Increase in the number of victims this matter came therefore, because the state began to go after more than they really constituted a real problem. Now, it is not only those who broke with the NAV of their schemes to get back to work, you provided hard to expand the catch.
What can we learn? First and foremost, that nearly all parts of the community must have a completely different awareness about the EEA-court importance. It is also learning in that state's zealous pursuit of rule breakers, in itself, was something of what led the matter wrong. Without both realizations is really little won.- This is devastating for Anniken Hauglie You can submit your article and opinion piece in Dagbladet here
Want to discuss?Visit Dagbladet debate!