Irresponsible court reversal – VG

This is a leader. The leader expresses VG’s attitude. VG’s political editor is responsible for the leader.

—-

The government, led by Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, has promised to reverse the already implemented judicial reform. New, far fewer managers have already been hired. They govern the new jurisdictions, each of which consists of several courts. The many former judges have received individual agreements, they retain their salaries and titles, and most continue to work as judges.

Children lose

The courts are still where they have always been. No courtrooms are empty. Trials are being held there, as before. People get their cases processed, as before. But the judges, those who make the decisions, have more colleagues to play on. They have larger professional environments, more to talk to about the difficult issues.

For example, in cases involving children, such as child distribution or child abuse. Children’s Ombudsman Inga Bejer Engh argued convincingly in NRK’s ​​Politisk Kvarter on Thursday that children have had their legal security strengthened through the new court reform. These are demanding cases, which can have major and lifelong consequences for vulnerable young people.

More progress in the cases

An overall legal professional environment has supported the judicial reform. Among other things, the Bar Association, the Judges’ Association, and a united Supreme Court.

These are professionals who have seen up close the weaknesses of the courts as they were before the reform. In an increasingly complicated and challenging reality, it became more and more difficult for courts with a small number of judges and thus small professional communities to embrace all the cases of various kinds that came to their table.

The need for increased competence and more colleagues to play on has been obvious for many years. The pressure on the various courts was also a problem. In some places there were long queues. People had to put their lives on hold. Elsewhere, there was less pressure, and thus actual capacity to take more cases.

With the new reform, it is easier to speed up matters throughout the country.

The starting point is that the cases are to be processed at people’s local court. But after the reform, there is a greater opportunity to get the issues raised elsewhere, if the parties so wish. This provides increased flexibility, and less strain for the many who previously had to wait a long time in court queues.

Equality before the law

It is absurd to spend time and money reorganizing something that so far works well. By all accounts far better than before. It is also very unclear to us how a reversal of the judicial reform will take place. Here, the Hurdal platform is unclear, yes, some would say incomprehensible.

We consciously choose to say that it is the symbolic policy that wins when the government in its Hurdal platform uses district considerations as a justification for reversing the judicial reform.

For this is not about districts towards big cities. It is a false contradiction in this context. Of course, it is not in the interests of the districts to weaken the citizens’ legal security.

Equality before the law is a fundamental principle of our rule of law. Justice Minister Emilie Enger Mehl must make sure that it includes everyone. No matter where they live in our country.

–