Note to Readers

Please Note: The editor of Norway Corruption blog is a member of the Ecology of Peace culture.

Summary of Ecology of Peace Problem Solving: The problems of poverty, unemployment, war, crime, violence, food shortages, food price increases, inflation, police brutality, political instability, loss of civil rights, vanishing species, garbage and pollution, urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, racism, sexism, Nazism, Islamism, feminism, Zionism etc; are the ecological overshoot consequences of humans living in accordance to a Masonic War is Peace international law social contract that provides humans the ‘right to breed and consume’ with total disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits.

Ecology of Peace factual reality: 1. Earth is not flat; 2. Resources are finite; 3. When humans breed or consume above ecological carrying capacity limits, it results in resource conflict; 4. If individuals, families, tribes, races, religions, and/or nations want to reduce class, racial and/or religious local, national and international resource war conflict; they should cooperate to implement an Ecology of Peace international law social contract that restricts all the worlds citizens to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; to sustainably protect and conserve natural resources.

EoP v WiP NWO negotiations are documented at MILED Clerk Notice.

Friday, June 22, 2012

[Update] 170 Bar Association Complaints filed against Norway v. Breivik Attorneys: Participation in StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Show Trial to Deny Defendent & Victims a Treason Trial



[Update] 170 Bar Association Complaints filed against Norway v. Breivik Attorneys (Defendant: 4; Victims Families: 166)

Norsk Advokat Foreningen/Bar Association: Complaints: Violation of: CCBE Code of Ethics: Obstruction of Justice Participation in a StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Show Trial, to (1) deny Defendant his Political Necessity Treason Trial; and (2) support Corruption of the Court. Complaint Submitted: [here]. Subsequent Correspondence to Bar Association: Disciplinary Committee & Disciplinary Board: [01]

Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 21 June 2012


From: Disiplinærnemnden for advokater: With reference to your e-mail of 20th of June, and your previous 170 complaints sent the Disciplinary Board last week.

From: Advokatforeningen: With reference to your e-mail below, and your previous 170 complaints send the Norwegian Bar Association's Disciplinary Committee last week.

From: Habeus 4 Mentem: Right to Legal Sanity:

[1] Please provide The Bar Association Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for demanding complainants waste paper, ink and non-renewable transporation resources by printing, signing and mailing complaints to the Bar Association; and refusing digitally signed complaints submitted by email, which are much more beneficial to the environment, and are exact environmentally digital copies of print versions?

[A] Does the Bar Association endorse the European Court of Human Rights (Lithgow & others v United Kingdom) principle that every individual who files a legal application to a Norwegian Court has a right to a timeous and precise written response informing them whether their application has been accepted, or if denied, reasons for such denial, or to inform the individual of additional information required before the complaint can be accepted?




Request to Norsk Advokaat Foreningen: Disciplinary Complaints: for Environment and Health Information ITO S.10 and S28

From: Lara [mailto:jmcswan@mweb.co.za]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 2:04 PM
To: 'Inger Johanne Hammer'; 'Baard Amundsen'
Cc: NO: Lippestad: Tord; Crt: Victims: Siv Hallgren; Crt: Victims: Frode Elgesem; Crt: Victims: Mette Yvonne Larsen
Subject: RE: Den Norske Advokatforening: Berit Reiss-Andersen: Req for Env. & Health Info ITO S.28 and S.10

Sec./Exec. Officer: Inger-Johanna Hammer
Comm: Baard Amundsen
The Norwegian Bar Association | Den Norske Advokatforening Juristenes Hus Kristian Augusts gate 9, 0164 Oslo
Tel: 22 03 50 50 | Fax: 22 11 53 25
E: ijh@advokatforeningen.no, ba@advokatforeningen.no

Dear Ms. Hammer,

CC: Norway v. Breivik Defence (4) & Victims Family Attorneys (166)

Many thanks for your email sent Friday, June 22, 2012 10:03 AM.

My apologies. Last time I contacted the Norwegian Bar Association, they kindly informed me whether the individual was a Bar Association member or not. I thought this was a service you provide; but clearly I am mistaken. I imagine the majority of complaints filed are member of your Bar Association; and you are simply stalling for time to obstruct the procedure of addressing my complaints. Its very common masculine insecurity (reason and logic) legal behaviour when a lawyer does not want to address the facts in any individuals complaint. Nevertheless I shall do the search and confirm which are members of the Bar Association.


Re: Legal Interest & Bar Association Complaints Policy:

You have not answered my request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) in terms of the Bar Association's Legal Interest and Complaints policies:

I repeat:

[2] The Bar Association 'Legal Interest' Decision Making Justifications:

[A] Does the Bar Association endorse the European Court of Human Rights (Lithgow & others v United Kingdom) principle that every individual who files a legal application to a Norwegian Court has a right to a timeous and precise written response informing them whether their application has been accepted, or if denied, reasons for such denial, or to inform the individual of additional information required before the complaint can be accepted?

[B] If so, if or when any Judge refuses to provide any applicant in any court proceeding that any Norwegian Lawyer is a participant in, with such prompt written response, it is the duty of honourable and ethical Lawyers to uphold the respect for impartial court due process proceedings to object to, and expose such discrimatory corrupt practices being practiced by a Norwegian Magistrate or Judge?

[C] In consideration for [A] and [B], could the Bar Association be detailed specific about how and why it alleges that my complaints do not meet the Bar Association's 'legal interest requirement'?

[D] Is the Bar Association's 'Legal Interest' Decision Making an Endorsement of Censoring Exposure of the Human-Farming-EcoSuicide-Kaffir-Legal-Matrix?: Whether the Bar Association's decision-making to allege that my complaint did not meet the 'Bar Association's 'legal interest requirement' had anything to do with silencing, suppressing or obstructing my legal applications to the court in this matter expoing the Human Farming Kaffir Legal Matrix: the Iron Mountain 'War is a Racket Military Industrial Complex's centralisation of power and tyranny , founded on Kaffir Law/Legislation which provides citizens with the Inalienable Eco-Suicide 'Right to Breed' and 'Right to Vote', but demands that Citizens need a Licence to Own a Gun, a Licence to Drive a Car, a Licence to Practice Law, a television licence, a credit licence, a licence to earn a living, a university exemption licence, a licence to fish, a licence to hunt, a liquor licence, a business licence, a marriage licence, a Marxist/Capitalist Traitor Hunting licence, etc, etc.

[D] Is the Bar Association's 'Legal Interest' Decision Making an Endorsement of Censoring Exposure of Norway's endorsement of the Legal Establishment's use of Whores of the Court Psychiatrists for the purposes of White Supremacy cultural supremacy and social control; ignoring the reality their 'Whores of the Court' Bullshit the public and the court with "psychobabble with scientific foundations equal to horoscope charts. the science behind it all is nonexistent"?

[3] The Bar Association Environmental Principles Decision-Making

[1] Please provide The Bar Association Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for demanding complainants waste paper, ink and non-renewable transporation resources by printing, signing and mailing complaints to the Bar Association; and refusing digitally signed complaints submitted by email, which are much more beneficial to the environment, and are exact environmentally digital copies of print versions?

[2] Please provide The Bar Association Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for printed complaints; when even third world goverments and Bar Associations environmental policies allow courts and organisations to accept email complaints?


ECHR: Rule of law requires adequately Precise and Accessible Legislation:

In Lithgow & others v United Kingdom, the European Court of Human Rights held that the rule of law requires provisions of legislation to be adequately accessible and sufficiently precise to enable people to regulate their affairs in accord with the law:

"As regards the phrase "subject to the conditions provided for by law", it requires in the first place the existence of and compliance with adequately accessible and sufficiently precise domestic legal provisions (see, amongst other authorities, the alone judgment of 2 August 1984, Series A no. 82, pp. 31-33, paras. 66-68)."

Conclusion Repeated:

If an individual files a legal application to a Norwegian Court; does the Bar Association support the due process principles; that

1. such an individual has a right to a prompt and clear written response from the Court informing the applicant their legal application has been accepted or if not, whether further information is required or what is required from the individual for such legal application to be accepted

2. When any legal applicant is denied such due process written response by the court; it is the honourable duty of all legal parties involved in the matter to uphold the respect for due process and the law, by demanding the Judge provide the applicant with a clear and written response to their application.

We live on a finite resource planet and not even Bar Associations have the right to believe that resources are infinite and to demand 'complaints' procedures that require complainants to waste scarce resources, when alternative procedures exist that are more environmentally resource friendly.

Respectfully Submitted

Lara Johnstone
Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity
Norway v. Breivik :: Uncensored
http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/


________________________________________
From: Inger Johanne Hammer
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 10:03 AM
To: Lara
Subject: RE: Den Norske Advokatforening: Berit Reiss-Andersen: Req for Env. & Health Info ITO S.28 and S.10


Lara Johnstone,

With reference to your e-mail below, and your previous 170 complaints send the Norwegian Bar Association's Disciplinary Committee last week.

Which lawyers that are members of the Norwegian Bar Association, can be found on the members list at the associations' website. We refer you to that list, where you can search up whether a lawyer is a member or not; http://www.advokatforeningen.no/Sok/Sok-i-medlemslisten/

On your question regarding legal interest, we refer you to the Disciplinary Committee's Regulations § 3 and to our e-mail of June 19th where all relevant information has been provided. Should you have any questions in regards to the complaints system, you can find further information under this link http://www.advokatenhjelperdeg.no/artikler/complaint-against-an-attorny/

As we already have informed you about, your potential complaints must be send by ordinary mail due to the fact that the Norwegian Bar Association's Disciplinary Committee does not accept any complaints sent by e-mail.

Med vennlig hilsen
Inger-Johanne Hammer
sekretær / Secretary
ADVOKATFORENINGEN / THE NORWEGIAN BAR ASSOCIATION
Kristian Augusts gate 9, N-0164 Oslo T + 47 22 03 50 50 E ijh@advokatforeningen.no
www.advokatforeningen.no www.advokatenhjelperdeg.no

» » » » [PDF :: Norsk Bar Assoc: Ethics]


Request to Judge Ernst Moe's: Disciplinary Board: for Environment and Health Information ITO S.10 and S28

Request to Judge Ernst Moe's: Disciplinary Board: for Environment and Health Information ITO S.10 and S28

From: Lara [mailto:jmcswan@mweb.co.za]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 8:05 PM
To: 'Disiplinærnemnden for advokater'; 'Judge Ernst Moe'
Subject: RE: Disciplinary Board Head: Judge Ernst Moe: Req for Env. & Health Info ITO S.28 and S.10

Head: Judge Ernst Moe
Sec: Beate Sundstrøm
Disciplinary Committee | Disiplinærnemnden Kristian Augustsgt. 9 0164 OSLO Tlf. 22 03 50 50 | Tlf: 22 03 51 08 | Fax 22 11 53 25

Dear Judge Moe,

Thanks for your email sent Friday, June 22, 2012 2:49 PM.

As I wrote to the Disciplinary Committee: My apologies. Last time I contacted the Norwegian Bar Association, they kindly informed me whether the individual was a Bar Association member or not. I thought this was a service they provide; but clearly I am mistaken. I imagine the majority of complaints filed are member of the Bar Association; and the Disciplinary Committee and Disciplinary Board are simply stalling for time to obstruct the procedure of addressing my complaints. Its very common masculine insecurity (reason and logic) legal behaviour when a lawyer does not want to address the facts in any individuals complaint. Nevertheless I shall do the search and confirm which are members of the Bar Association.

Re: Legal Interest & Disciplinary Boards Complaints Policy:

You have not answered my request for Access to Environment and Health Information in terms of S.28 (Freedom of Information Act) and S.10 (Environmental Law) in terms of the Bar Association's Legal Interest and Complaints policies:

I repeat:

Request for Information:

[2] The Disciplinary Board’s ‘Legal Interest’ Decision Making Justifications:

[A] Does the Disciplinary Board endorse the European Court of Human Rights (Lithgow & others v United Kingdom) principle that every individual who files a legal application to a Norwegian Court has a right to a timeous and precise written response informing them whether their application has been accepted, or if denied, reasons for such denial, or to inform the individual of additional information required before the complaint can be accepted?

[B] If so, if or when any Judge refuses to provide any applicant in any court proceeding that any Norwegian Lawyer is a participant in, with such prompt written response, it is the duty of honourable and ethical Lawyers to uphold the respect for impartial court due process proceedings to object to, and expose such discrimatory corrupt practices being practiced by a Norwegian Magistrate or Judge?

[C] In consideration for [A] and [B], could the Disciplinary Board be detailed specific about how and why it alleges that my complaints do not meet the Disciplinary Boards ‘legal interest requirement’?

[D] Is the Disciplinary Board’s ‘Legal Interest’ Decision Making an Endorsement of Censoring Exposure of the Human-Farming-EcoSuicide-Kaffir-Legal-Matrix?: Whether the Disciplinary Board’s decision-making to allege that my complaint did not meet the Disciplinary Board’s ‘legal interest requirement’ had anything to do with silencing, suppressing or obstructing my legal applications to the court in this matter expoing the Human Farming Kaffir Legal Matrix: the Iron Mountain ‘War is a Racket Military Industrial Complex’s centralisation of power and tyranny , founded on Kaffir Law/Legislation which provides citizens with the Inalienable Eco-Suicide ‘Right to Breed’ and ‘Right to Vote’, but demands that Citizens need a Licence to Own a Gun, a Licence to Drive a Car, a Licence to Practice Law, a television licence, a credit licence, a licence to earn a living, a university exemption licence, a licence to fish, a licence to hunt, a liquor licence, a business licence, a marriage licence, a Marxist/Capitalist Traitor Hunting licence, etc, etc.

[D] Is the Disciplinary Board’s ‘Legal Interest’ Decision Making an Endorsement of Censoring Exposure of Norway’s endorsement of the Legal Establishment’s use of ‘Whores of the Court’ Psychiatrists for the purposes of White Supremacy cultural supremacy and social control; ignoring the reality their ‘Whores of the Court’ Bullshit the public and the court with “psychobabble with scientific foundations equal to horoscope charts… the science behind it all is nonexistent”?


[3] The Disciplinary Board’s Environmental Principles Decision-Making

[1] Please provide the Disciplinary Board’s Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for demanding complainants waste paper, ink and non-renewable transporation resources by printing, signing and mailing complaints to the Disciplinary Board’s; and refusing digitally signed complaints submitted by email, which are much more beneficial to the environment, and are exact environmentally digital copies of print versions?

[2] Please provide Disciplinary Board’s Complaints Environmental Principles decision-making justifications for printed complaints; when even third world goverments and Bar Associations environmental policies allow courts and organisations to accept email complaints?

[..]

Conclusion:

If an individual files a legal application to a Norwegian Court; does the Disciplinary Board’s support the due process principles; that

1. Such an individual has a right to a prompt and clear written response from the Court informing the applicant their legal application has been accepted or if not, whether further information is required or what is required from the individual for such legal application to be accepted;

2. When any legal applicant is denied such due process written response by the court; it is the honourable duty of all legal parties involved in the matter to uphold the respect for due process and the law, by demanding the Judge provide the applicant with a clear and written response to their application.

We live on a finite resource planet and not even Bar Associations have the right to believe that resources are infinite and to demand ‘complaints’ procedures that require complainants to waste scarce resources, when alternative procedures exist that are more environmentally resource friendly.

Please see PDF sent to the Disciplinary Board by email on 20. juni 2012 14:38


Respectfully Submitted

Lara Johnstone
Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity
Norway v. Breivik :: Uncensored
http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/


________________________________________
From: Disiplinærnemnden for advokater
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 2:49 PM
To: 'Lara'
Subject: RE: Disciplinary Board Head: Judge Ernst Moe: Req for Env. & Health Info ITO S.28 and S.10

Lara Johnstone,

With reference to your e-mail of 20th of June, and your previous 170 complaints sent the Disciplinary Board last week.

A list of the Norwegian Bar Association’s members is available at; http://www.advokatforeningen.no/Sok/Sok-i-medlemslisten .

Regarding your question concerning legal interest, we refer to the Regulations for Advocates (Advokatforskriften) § 5-3 and to our e-mail of June 19th where all the relevant information has been provided. If you have further questions regarding our complaint system, you can find more information at http://www.advokatenhjelperdeg.no/artikler/complaint-against-an-attorny/ .

As previously mentioned, your potential complaints must be sent by ordinary mail due to the fact that the Disciplinary Board does not accept any complaints sent by e-mail.

Regards The Disciplinary Board

» » » » [PDF :: Norsk Bar Assoc: Ethics]




No comments:

FLEUR-DE-LIS HUMINT :: F(x) Population Growth x F(x) Declining Resources = F(x) Resource Wars

KaffirLilyRiddle: F(x)population x F(x)consumption = END:CIV
Human Farming: Story of Your Enslavement (13:10)
Unified Quest is the Army Chief of Staff's future study plan designed to examine issues critical to current and future force development... - as the world population grows, increased global competition for affordable finite resources, notably energy and rare earth materials, could fuel regional conflict. - water is the new oil. scarcity will confront regions at an accelerated pace in this decade.
US Army: Population vs. Resource Scarcity Study Plan
Human Farming Management: Fake Left v. Right (02:09)
ARMY STRATEGY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT: Office of Dep. Asst. of the Army Environment, Safety and Occupational Health: Richard Murphy, Asst for Sustainability, 24 October 2006
2006: US Army Strategy for Environment
CIA & Pentagon: Overpopulation & Resource Wars [01] [02]
Peak NNR: Scarcity: Humanity’s Last Chapter: A Comprehensive Analysis of Nonrenewable Natural Resource (NNR) Scarcity’s Consequences, by Chris Clugston
Peak Non-Renewable Resources = END:CIV Scarcity Future
Race 2 Save Planet :: END:CIV Resist of Die (01:42) [Full]