“Norway: the Anonymous witness allowed – but unusual”
“Svårutredda violent crimes weigh heavily on the Swedish judicial system. One problem is that many are hesitant to testify for fear of reprisals.”
“Those who think that the solution is anonymous witnesses often point to Norway, where witnesses could be interviewed anonymously since 2001.”
“But where has the opportunity been used very rarely.”
“It started with a konststöld. When Edvard Munch’s painting the Scream was stolen from the national gallery in Norway in 1994 was the Norwegian police assisted by british secret agents. They wanted later not to testify under their real name, and thus to destroy it under the cover-identity as they have devoted years to building up.”
“the Supreme court of Norway noted, however, that the agents according to the Norwegian law would be forced to testify under their real names. This led to a political debate, which landed in Norway in 2001 introduced the possibility to interrogate the witnesses anonymously. But in the eighteen years that have passed, it has not been used very often.”
“– Really, it has perhaps been used surprisingly rarely. It is enough that the rules are complicated to follow, ” said the prosecutor Stein Vale at Oslo statsadvokatembeter.”
“Stein Vale know of two cases where police officers testified anonymously. He has also worked on a case where a woman who happened to be a witness to a serious drug-related offences did not want to disclose their identity. She sat in an adjacent room during the hearing at the hearing, so that the right only heard her voice.”
“– She had a brother who had been deeply involved in the narkotikakretsar and who had advised against her to testify, that she could otherwise expect retaliation. So she had a desire to be anonymous, ” says Vale.”
“the Rules in Norway, says that the defendant’s lawyer may choose whether they want to know the identity of the witness or not.”
“– And the most wise the defender chooses not to know, so that they have the same information as the defendant. They can set themselves in a precarious situation if they choose to get to know the identity, ” says Stein Vale.”
“– the Requirement is you have the opportunity to interrogate the witness as the accused person. And there you have the full, even if you do not know the identity. So I really have no serious qualms with this order, he continues.”
“Witness with disguise”
“Advokatforeningen, the Norwegian equivalent of the Swedish Bar association, was opposed to anonymous witnesses when it was introduced, and it is basically still. The main reason is that it complicates the implementation of a good cross-examination when you don’t get to know who the person you ask out really is, ” says the general secretary Merete Smith.”
“– at the same time we understand that there may be situations where it may be difficult to provide his / her identity. There are important considerations which are opposed to each other, ” she says.”
“There are, however, more or less good way to make use of anonymous witnesses, like Smith. To have with a witness in the video link, which wears any disguise in order to reduce the risk of identification, can work well.”
“– But if you just call up a phone number and someone answers at the other end that you don’t know who it is, can’t name or can’t see – it is difficult, ” says Merete Smith.”
“In Sweden want several parliamentary parties that the issue of anonymous witnesses should be investigated. Even the attorney-general has said that an investigation might have to, to get more people to testify.”
“Even if it is rarely used claims Stein Vale to anonymous witnesses is an important tool in law enforcement.”
“– In many situations, so know the accused already who the witness is. On the basis of the evidence they can figure out that it can only be a specific person. But as in my case, where it was about a woman who just happened to be a witness, it is a good example of when it might be useful, ” he says, and continues:”
” It is also when the police infiltrate the environments and thus may present evidence, so that they can preserve their anonymity and continue with the type of work.”
“Anonymous witnesses, in accordance with the provisions in Norway only used in the case of particularly serious crime, serious violence or drug offences.”
“There must also be a risk that the witness was exposed for the crimes that risk the life, health and freedom if the identity becomes known.”
“It is also permissible to let the police officers who worked under the cover to be anonymous.”
“According to the defense counsel get to know the witness’s identity, but he or she can also choose not to receive the enlightenment.”
