Advertisement

Best in Class? Norwegian Incarceration and the Pragmatic Production of Legitimacy

  • Thomas Horn
  • Thomas Ugelvik
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology book series (PSIPP)

Abstract

What happens when a self-styled humanitarian superpower receives external human rights-based criticism? To what extent has the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) influenced Norwegian prisons and Norwegian penal policy and jurisprudence? How has this criticism been understood, what has been the response and what have been the effects at the practical level—if any? In our chapter, we discuss Norwegian self-perception and attitudes toward human rights and penal policy. Then we briefly describe the influence of the ECHR in Norway before we discuss the influence of CPT visits. Concerning CPT, we draw attention to two specific cases in particular: the case of pre-trial solitary confinement and the country’s single high-security immigration detention centre.

Keywords

Norway ECtHR CPT Self-perceived humanitarianism Two case studies 

Literature

  1. Andersson, R. 2011. A Blessing in Disguise: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Diagnosis and Swedish Correctional Treatment Policy in the Twenty-First Century. In Penal Exceptionalism? Nordic Prison Policy and Practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Barker, V. 2012. Nordic Exceptionalism Revisited: Explaining the Paradox of a Janus-Faced Penal Regime. Theoretical Criminology 17 (1): 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bronebakk, K.B. 2012. Hvis Det Var Mitt Barn. In Festskrift Til Inger Marie Fridhov, ed. Y. Hammerlin and B. Johnsen. Oslo: KRUS.Google Scholar
  4. Bruhn, A., O. Lindberg, and P.-Å. Nylander. 2011. A Harsher Prison Climate and a Cultural Heritage Working Against It: Subcultural Divisions Among Prison Officers. In Penal Exceptionalism? Nordic Prison Policy and Practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Christie, N. 1970. Modeller for Fengselsorganisasjonen. In I Stedet for Fengsel, ed. R. Østensen. Oslo: Pax.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 2007. Limits to Pain. Eugene: Wipf & Stock.Google Scholar
  7. Committee Against Torture. 2008. Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 19 of the Convention. Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee Against Torture, Norway. CAT/C/NOR/CO/5, February 5.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2012. Concluding Observations on the Combined Sixth and Seventh Periodic Reports of Norway, Adopted by the Committee at Its Forty-Ninth Session (29 October to 23 November 2012). CAT/C/NOR/CO/6–7, December 13.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, M.D., and R. Morgan. 1998. Preventing Torture. A Study of the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fridhov, I.M. 2013. Norge: Tilbakeføringsgarantien Og Forvaltningssamarbeid. In Løsladelse: Planlægning Og Samarbejde I Danmark, Norge Og Sverige, ed. A. Storgaard. Aarhus: Nordisk Samarbejdsråd for Kriminologi.Google Scholar
  11. Horn, T. 2017. Fullstendig isolasjon ved risiko for bevisforspillelse: Rettspolitiske vurderinger. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  12. Human Rights Committee. 2006. Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 40 of the Covenant. Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee, Norway. CCPR/C/NOR/CO/5, April 25.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 2011. Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 40 of the Covenant. Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee, Norway. CCPR/C/NOR/CO/6, November 18.Google Scholar
  14. Johnsen, B., and P.K. Granheim. 2011. Prison Size and the Quality of Life in Norwegian Closed Prisons in Late Modernity. In Penal Exceptionalism? Nordic Prison Policy and Practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Mathiesen, T. 2011. Scandinavian Exceptionalism in Penal Matters: Reality or Wishful Thinking? In Penal Exceptionalism? Nordic Prison Policy and Practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. MoJ. 2008. Straff Som Virker – Mindre Kriminalitet – Tryggere Samfunn. St.meld. nr. 37 (2007–2008). Oslo: Ministry of Justice and the Police.Google Scholar
  17. Morgan, R., and M. Evans. 2002. Combating Torture in Europe. The Work and Standards of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Pratt, J. 2008a. Scandinavian Exceptionalism in an Era of Penal Excess, Part I: The Nature and Roots of Scandinavian Exceptionalism. British Journal of Criminology 48 (2): 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. ———. 2008b. Scandinavian Exceptionalism in an Era of Penal Excess, Part II: Does Scandinavian Exceptionalism Have a Future? British Journal of Criminology 48 (3): 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pratt, J., and A. Eriksson. 2011. In Defence of Scandinavian Exceptionalism. In Penal Exceptionalism? Nordic Prison Policy and Practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 2012. Contrasts in Punishment: An Explanation of Anglophone Excess and Nordic Exceptionalism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Shammas, V.L. 2014. The Pains of Freedom: Assessing the Ambiguity of Scandinavian Penal Exceptionalism on Norway’s Prison Island. Punishment and Society 16 (1): 104–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sivilombudsmannen. 2015. Besøksrapport: Politiets utlendingsinternat på Trandum 19–21 mai 2015. Oslo: Sivilombudsmannen.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, E. 2011a. Vil de som er imot, rekke opp hånden? Om menneskerettigheter, (annen) rett og demokrati. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift, 49–60.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, P.S. 2011b. A Critical Look at Scandinavian Exceptionalism: Welfare State Theories, Penal Populism, and Prison Conditions in Denmark and Scandinavia. In Penal Exceptionalism? Nordic Prison Policy and Practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Smith, P.S., and T. Ugelvik. 2017. Introduction: Punishment, Welfare and Prison History in Scandinavia. In Scandinavian Penal History, Culture and Prison Practice: Embraces by the Welfare State? ed. P.S. Smith and T. Ugelvik. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Strand, V.B. 2009. Forskjellsbehandling på grunn av religion og livssyn ved ansettelser i tros- og livssynssamfunn. In Arbeid og rett. Festskrift til Henning Jakhellns 70-årsdag, ed. V.B. Strand and H. Aune. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.Google Scholar
  28. Tvedt, T. 2006. Utviklingshjelp, Utenrikspolitikk Og Den Norske Modellen. Historisk tidsskrift 85 (1): 59–85.Google Scholar
  29. Ugelvik, T. 2011a. The Dark Side of a Culture of Equality: Reimagining Communities in a Norwegian Remand Prison. In Penal exceptionalism? Nordic prison policy and practice, ed. T. Ugelvik and J. Dullum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. ———. 2011b. Hva Er Et Fengsel?: En Analyse Av Manualen Til En Sosial Teknologi. Retfærd 34 (1): 85–100.Google Scholar
  31. ———. 2013. Hvem Er Maria Amelie? Fortellinger Om Ulovlighet. In Krimmigrasjon? Den Nye Kontrollen Av De Fremmede, ed. N.B. Johansen, T. Ugelvik, and K.F. Aas. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  32. Ugelvik, S., and T. Ugelvik. 2013. Immigration Control in Ultima Thule: Detention and Exclusion, Norwegian Style. European Journal of Criminology 10 (6): 709–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wasvik, M. 2015. Trandum Utlendingsinternat: En Historie Om Overgrep Og Skandaler. Radikal Portal. http://radikalportal.no/2015/04/22/trandum-utlendingsinternat-og-historien-om-overgrep-og-skandaler/. Accessed 25 Aug 2016.
  34. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. 2007. Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Addendum, Mission to Norway. A/HRC/7/4/Add.2, October 11.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Horn
    • 1
  • Thomas Ugelvik
    • 2
  1. 1.Schjødt Law FirmOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of Criminology and Sociology of LawUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations