Parl. Ombudsman: Case 2012-1943: Slow Case Processing of Norway v Breivik Complaint to Secretariat for Supv. Committee of Judges: Against Justice Tore Schei | Judge Wenche Arntzen | Judge Nina Opsahl
[SOM: 2012-1943]: Re: Tilsynsutvalget for dommere: Klage: Justice Tore Schei | Judge Wenche Arntzen | Judge Nina Opsahl
20 July 2012 | Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik
On 04 July 2012, I filed two complaints with the Ombudsmans office, via their official complaints procedure.
On 20 July I received a response from the Ombudsman offices by land mail (Ref: 2012/1943), in response to my complaint to the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee of Judges:
“On 30 May 2012 complainant filed three complaints with the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee of Judges respectively against respectively: (1) Judge Tore Schei, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen and (3) Judge Nina Opsahl. On 06 June 2012 complainant noted that she had not yet received any information detailing the process and procedure for her complaints, and additionally provided the completed signed “Skjema for klage på dommere til Tilsynsutvalget for dommere (TU)” forms for her complaints. On 02 July 2012-07-02 complainant noted: “I am still waiting for the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, to provide me with a Case and/or Reference Number for my complaint/s, including details about processing of my complaint/s in Norway v. Breivik matter against respectively: (1) Judge Nina Opsahl, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen & (3) Chief Justice Tore Schei.””
As per the Ombudsman's Instructions, I again contacted the Secretariat Supervisory Committee of Judges for a response, and noted that in the absence of such a response, I shall again contact the Ombudsman, to provide his Office with the information to proceed in the matter.
Notice to Secretariat for Supv. Committee of Judges & Relevant Norway v. Breivik Parties
From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 12:14 PM
To: 'Supv. Comm. Judges'
Cc: 'Norway Supreme Court Admin'; Ch.Justice Tore Schei (**@hoyesterett.no); NO: Crt: Breivik: Oslo District Court (**@domstol.no); NO Oslo District Court: Admin (**@domstol.no); Judge Wenche Arntzen (**@domstol.no); Judge Nina Opsahl (**@domstol.no)
Subject: [SOM: 2012-1943]: Re: Tilsynsutvalget for dommere: Klage: Justice Tore Schei | Judge Wenche Arntzen | Judge Nina Opsahl
Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges
National Courts Administration,
Tel: 73 56 70 00 | Fax: 73 56 70 01
CC: Justice Schei, Judge Arntzen, Judge Opsahl [SS]
CC: Norway Supreme Court, Oslo District Court [SS]
CC: Norway v. Breivik: Prosecutor, Victims Families, Defendant [SS]
RE: 30 May 2012 Violation of Ethical Principles for Norwegian Judges complaints against Complaint against Chief Justice Tore Schei; Judge Wenche Arntzen and Judge Nina Opsahl.
I am still waiting for the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, to provide me with a Case and/or Reference Number for my complaint/s, including details about processing of my complaint/s in Norway v. Breivik matter against respectively: (1) Judge Nina Opsahl, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen & (3) Chief Justice Tore Schei.
Please Note:
1. In case of Absence of Response from Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, providing a case number and details of processing of my complaint (or alternatively a final date by when such information shall be provided to me by the Committee), by 27 July 2012; the complaint shall be submitted to:
Parliamentary Ombudsman
Head of Division: Berit Sollie
Advisor: Torbjorn Hagerup Nagelhus
Case: 2012/1943
Re: Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee of Judges
2. As a member of Radical Honesty culture, I practice Total Transparency; hence have no requirements for secrecy. All correspondence can be submitted by email.
Respectfully Submitted
Lara Johnstone
Radical Honoursty EcoFeminist
Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity
Norway v. Breivik :: Uncensored
http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/
Lara (Clann/Tribe Name: Johnstone): I (Sovereign or alleged Corporate identity) do not endorse any contract which does not fulfill the four requirements of a lawful, binding contract, namely: (1) Full Disclosure; (2) Equal Consideration; (3) Lawful Clear and Concise Terms and Conditions simply explained; and (4) Signatures of both/all Parties. All my correspondence is public and a matter of record. If you wish to conduct private correspondence with me: File a written request, including your evidence and reasons, and only if your evidence is of sufficient weight, shall I be willing to enter into an agreement with you to keep your correspondence 'private' (i.e. secret). As a member of Radical Honesty culture I always endorse the resolution of all disagreements and/or misunderstandings in accordance to Radical Honesty cultural practices (See: Practicing Radical Honesty, by Brad Blanton & Concourt CCT 23-10 order by Justices on 03 May 2010: "The Chief Justice has issued the following directions: Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of the Radical Honesty Culture and Religion is admitted as an Amicus Curiae."), or via independent arbitration that does not involve bloodsucking parasite lawyers; and am willing to consider the practices of other cultures, who seriously and sincerely consider mine.
» » » » [PDF: SOM: 2012-1943 ]
Notice to Parliamentary Ombudsman
From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 12:27 PM
To: 'Parliamentary Ombudsman'
Subject: RE: Sivilombudsmannen: (1) General & (2) Ref: 2012/1943: Att: Torbjorn H Nagelhus
(1) The Parliamentary Ombudsman for Public Administration
P.O. Box 3 Sentrum NO - 0101 Oslo
Telephone: +47 22 82 85 00
Tel: 22 82 85 00 | Toll: 800 800 39 | Fax: 22 82 85 11
E-mail: postmottak@sivilombudsmannen.no
(2) Attention: Torbjorn Hagerup Nagelhus
SOM Reference: 2012/1943
Dear Parliamentary Ombudsman & Mr. Nagelhus,
On 04 July 2012, I filed two complaints with the Ombudsmans office, via your official complaints procedure.
On 19 July I contacted your office by email to inform you that I had not yet received a response to my complaints within the two week period advised.
On 20 July I received a response from your offices by land mail (Ref: 2012/1943). I imagine the Ombudsman's response to my second complaint is also sent by land mail. I shall give it more time to arrive.
(2) I have followed the instructions of the Ombudsman as required in Correspondence dated 11.07.2012 (Ref 2012/1943): Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee of Judges. In the absence of any response from the Supervisory Committee of Judges by 27.07.2012, I shall again contact your office in the matter.
Respectfully
Lara Johnstone
Radical Honoursty EcoFeminist
Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity
Norway v. Breivik :: Uncensored
http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/
********************************************************************
20 July 2012: [SOM: 2012-1943]: Re: Tilsynsutvalget for dommere:
Klage: Justice Tore Schei | Judge Wenche Arntzen | Judge Nina Opsahl
********************************************************************
From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 12:14 PM
To: 'Supv. Comm. Judges'
Cc: 'Norway Supreme Court Admin'; Ch.Justice Tore Schei (**@hoyesterett.no); NO: Crt: Breivik: Oslo District Court (**@domstol.no); NO Oslo District Court: Admin (**@domstol.no); Judge Wenche Arntzen (**@domstol.no); Judge Nina Opsahl (**@domstol.no)
Subject: [SOM: 2012-1943]: Re: Tilsynsutvalget for dommere: Klage: Justice Tore Schei | Judge Wenche Arntzen | Judge Nina Opsahl
Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges
National Courts Administration,
Tel: 73 56 70 00 | Fax: 73 56 70 01
CC: Justice Schei, Judge Arntzen, Judge Opsahl
CC: Norway Supreme Court, Oslo District Court
RE: 30 May 2012 Violation of Ethical Principles for Norwegian Judges complaints against Complaint against Chief Justice Tore Schei; Judge Wenche Arntzen and Judge Nina Opsahl.
I am still waiting for the Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, to provide me with a Case and/or Reference Number for my complaint/s, including details about processing of my complaint/s in Norway v. Breivik matter against respectively: (1) Judge Nina Opsahl, (2) Judge Wenche Arntzen & (3) Chief Justice Tore Schei.
Please Note:
1. In case of Absence of Response from Secretariat of the Supervisory Committee for Judges, providing a case number and details of processing of my complaint (or alternatively a final date by when such information shall be provided to me by the Committee), by 27 July 2012; the complaint shall be submitted to:
Parliamentary Ombudsman
Head of Division: Berit Sollie
Advisor: Torbjorn Hagerup Nagelhus
Case: 2012/1943
Re: Lack of Response from the Supervisory Committee of Judges
2. As a member of Radical Honesty culture, I practice Total Transparency; hence have no requirements for secrecy. All correspondence can be submitted by email.
Respectfully Submitted
Lara Johnstone
Radical Honoursty EcoFeminist
Habeus Mentem: Right 2 Legal Sanity
Norway v. Breivik :: Uncensored
http://norway-v-breivik.blogspot.com/
Lara (Clann/Tribe Name: Johnstone): I (Sovereign or alleged Corporate identity) do not endorse any contract which does not fulfill the four requirements of a lawful, binding contract, namely: (1) Full Disclosure; (2) Equal Consideration; (3) Lawful Clear and Concise Terms and Conditions simply explained; and (4) Signatures of both/all Parties. All my correspondence is public and a matter of record. If you wish to conduct private correspondence with me: File a written request, including your evidence and reasons, and only if your evidence is of sufficient weight, shall I be willing to enter into an agreement with you to keep your correspondence 'private' (i.e. secret). As a member of Radical Honesty culture I always endorse the resolution of all disagreements and/or misunderstandings in accordance to Radical Honesty cultural practices (See: Practicing Radical Honesty, by Brad Blanton & Concourt CCT 23-10 order by Justices on 03 May 2010: "The Chief Justice has issued the following directions: Ms. Lara Johnstone, Member of the Radical Honesty Culture and Religion is admitted as an Amicus Curiae."), or via independent arbitration that does not involve bloodsucking parasite lawyers; and am willing to consider the practices of other cultures, who seriously and sincerely consider mine.
» » » » [PDF: SOM: 2012-1943 ]
No comments:
Post a Comment