the Case oppateres
the Parliamentary control parliamentary scrutiny and constitutional committee sent 11. January a sensational critical letter to Parliament’s presidency.
Where the ba committee the presidency for answers and documentation in connection with a battle between the presidency and Parliament kontrollutvalg for intelligence, surveillance and security service (EOS range).
on Thursday sent the presidency his response where they do not admit wrong, but sorry four smaller conditions. It appears from your letter that the presidency believes it has not committed the wrong that has had a significant impact on the proceedings.
Here you can read the entire letter from the presidency.
In the letter, signed by the Parliament’s president Olemic Thommessen concludes as follows:
“the Presidency (will) point out four conditions that could have been handled in a better way:
- The fact that the control and konstitusjonskomiteen not received a copy of a letter dated 4. June 2014 to Evalueringsutvalget regarding the committee’s mandate and the committee’s notes on Setting 159 S (2013-2014).
- poor communication between the EOS-selection and administration and the presidency since in september 2014 was 12 clear that the committee was in disagreement in the formal basis for the exemption from the obligation of confidentiality.
- it was seven weeks from the særmeldingen came from the EOS-selection to the was referred.
- That the printing of the særmeldingen was implemented too late.
It is almost 12 pages long letter is a very detailed review of the conditions as the committee took up in his letter a week ago.
the Background for the case was that the Norwegian Parliament in 2014 discounted a selection, Solbakken-selection, which was to evaluate the EOS-selection. According to the committee has the presidency made changes in the mandate of the Solbakken-selection, so that a point, Parliament wanted to have with – to look at foreign states ‘ surveillance in the Uk – fell out.
In addition, there was a controversy as to whether the presidency could exempt members of the EOS-selection for the duty of confidentiality, so that they could explain themselves for evalueringsutvalget. After several months of treatment gave the presidency and gave the EOS-selection of the legal authority that they asked for.
In the ending of the letter comes the presidency with the following sigh:
“the Presidency hopes the report which is given above, helps to clarify the questions the committee had in the matter. The presidency at the same time wish to add that several of these questions could have been answered at an earlier time through better communication between the committee and the presidency of the ambiguities the committee perceive. It appears again to the dialogue about the case that took place in march and april 2015 between the presidency and the control and konstitusjonskomiteen.
the Presidency emphasises again that it never has been the presidency or the administration’s intention to hide disagreement or coaches Evalueringsutvalgets work. Evalueringsutvalget delivered 29. February 2016 a thorough report, which hopefully will form the basis for an interesting debate about the EOS-selection in a future-oriented perspective.”
the Case is updated.