Okay, I’ve reviewed the article and can provide a summary of the criticisms surrounding the revised Civil Protection Act in Norway:
Main Criticisms of the Revised Civil Protection Act:
Government Overreach: The initial version of the bill was criticized for giving the government too much power at the expense of the storting (Parliament). Professor Høgberg‘s social media post highlighting this lead to a pause in the Storting’s consideration of the bill.
Insufficient Storting Control: Even with amendments, critics like Professor Tvedt argue that the Storting’s ability to effectively oversee and intervene in the government’s actions under the law is limited. The 48-hour window for discussion before measures take effect is seen as insufficient.
Cosmetic Changes: Professor Tvedt believes the changes made are largely cosmetic and don’t fundamentally address the power imbalance the law creates.He suggests the Storting should have the power to repeal any provision enacted under the law.
Process Concerns: Professor Høgberg is critical of the overall process by which the law was handled, suggesting it wasn’t a good democratic process.
Total Defense planning: Høgberg believes the government should have planned the total defense, ie what should be civil and military contributions in a crisis, before The La Fram Crisis Act.
Changes Made to Address Concerns (but deemed insufficient by some):
confidential Information: The government can no longer require the disclosure of confidential information from lawyers, doctors, priests, etc.
Involvement of Parties in working Life: The government must involve relevant parties, such as trade unions.
48-Hour Notice: The government must provide the Storting with a 48-hour overview before ordering actions.
In essence, while some changes were made to soften the initial criticism, the core concern remains that the law grants the government excessive power with inadequate oversight from the Storting, possibly impacting the balance of power in Norway.
