Climate change has renewed the debate about shipping in the Arctic due to an expected reduction of ice in these sea lanes. Because of the Arctic slowly opening, allowing for more activity, navigational rights for ships have caught the attention of the world once again, including those of warships. Through analysing the navigational regime for warships in the Northwest and Northeast Passages, this article aims to introduce the different rules for navigation and the consequences for maritime operations in the Arctic, including the right to overflight. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides navigational rights for warships and overflight in peace time operations, but the matter of which navigation rules should apply in the passages is under debate. Based on an analysis of the Convention, case law, legal theory and customary law, the article aims to shed light on different interpretations of the legal regimes of navigation in the passages and which rules should apply to warships and overflight in the future.
This article proposes a model of anthropocentric ocean connectivity based on the concept of human perspective as location. Within this location, anthropocentrism can be, but is not necessarily, an exclusive or dominant valuation of the human. In fact, conceptions of both anthropocentrism and of ocean connectivity are pluralistic. These and other pluralisms are borne out in this article's content and structure, which takes the form of explorations of anthropocentric connectivity in relation to four specific ocean-related human activities. First, Jan Solski applies understandings of connectivity as "flow" in the context of strategic ocean geopolitics. Second, Iva Parlov analyzes current doctrinal issues and interactions at the international level with respect to the legal regime for places of refuge for ships in need of assistance. Third, Maria Madalena das Neves examines ocean connectivity in the context of transboundary energy trade and market integration, with particular attention to geopolitical and ecological connectivity. Finally, Julia Gaunce proposes that the making and application of transnational rules and standards for ships in polar waters enhances certain connections and disrupts others, to the detriment of oceans and people, and that broadening connectivity especially in respect of Arctic Indigenous people(s) could help address challenges faced by oceans and ocean governance.
Certification according to private sustainability standards (ecolabelling) has become an important addition to public fisheries management in recent years. The major global ecolabel in terms of comprehensiveness and coverage is the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Standard. Under the MSC Standard, the status of the fishery's target stocks, its impact on the wider ecosystem and the effectiveness of its management system are assessed. Becoming and remaining certified requires continuous behavioural adaptation from fisheries through a fine-meshed system of conditions attached to certification. In this article, MSC certification of two clusters of fisheries in Arctic waters is discussed, one large- and one small-scale. In the Barents Sea cod and haddock fisheries, the main obstacle to certification has been the fisheries' impact on endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species and bottom habitats, and in order to remain certified beyond the first five-year certification period, the fishing companies have had to introduce a number of voluntary measures beyond what is required by law. In the local lumpfish fisheries in Greenland, Iceland and Norway, conditions attached to certification have been related to the effects of these fisheries on seabirds and marine mammals. Here essential parts of a management regime, such as biological reference points and harvest control rules, have come about as a direct result of MSC certification. MSC certification is no panacea, but it seems to have found a niche as a supplement to national legislation and international agreements.
The duty of states to consult indigenous communities is a well-established legal principle, but its implications for practice remain uncertain. Sweden is finding itself at a particularly critical juncture as it prepares to legislate a duty to consult the Sami people in line with its international obligations. This paper explores the ability of Swedish state actors to implement the duty to consult, based on lessons from an already existing duty set out in Swedish minority law, namely to ensure the effective participation of minorities in land and resource decisions. Presenting novel empirical material on the views of Sami communities and state officials in ministries and agencies, we demonstrate the existence of considerable implementation gaps linked to practice, sectoral legislation, and political discourse. We argue that if state duties are to promote the intended intercultural reconciliation, then new measures are needed to ensure enforcement, e.g. via mechanisms of appeal and rules of nullification. In addition, sectoral resource regulations should be amended to refer to the duties set out in minority law and/or a potential new bill on consultation duty in a consistent manner. In the near-term, the state should ensure that Sami communities are adequately resourced to engage in consultation and should invest in state authorities' own ability to implement, i.e. through competence development, staffing, intersectoral coordination, and independent evaluation. Much could also be gained if state agencies and Sami communities worked together to develop detailed consultation routines for relevant resource sectors.
It is a long known fact that climate change will result in sea level rise and dramatically changed coastlines for a number of coastal States, and the physical consequences of sea level rise are most likely unavoidable for several coastal States due to their geographical location, size and topography. It is highly debatable whether the Law of the Sea Convention is equipped for dealing with the current challenges of sea level rise and maritime limits, and it may be argued that its rule of ambulatory baselines may contribute to loss of territory, relocation of maritime zones, uncertainty and instability.
This article investigates the current status of the law regulating maritime limits which may be affected by sea level rise, and argues that the best solution is to adapt the law within the current legal framework of the Law of the Sea, by undertaking a liberal interpretation of the already existing provisions of the LOSC, instead of invoking the amendment procedures of the LOSC, a new supplementary agreement or creating new customary law. In particular, the article explores the option of re-interpreting the law of baselines in Article 7, offering an adapting measure that mitigates the climate change effects on sea level rise. It is argued that a liberal interpretation of the LOSC can contribute to increased stability and juridical protection of the maritime entitlements for some of the States suffering the consequences of sea level rise.
Local police departments receive a vast number of calls annually from the healthcare sector, the education sector, the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration, other social service agencies, families, friends, neighbors and others, expressing concern that individuals or groups might be, or are at risk of becoming, violent extremists. The majority are unwarranted.
Yet Norway has, in recent years, experienced that extremists can inflict a great deal of damage, pain, fear and death – not just on individual victims, but on society as a whole. How can the relevant authorities intervene in time to prevent such events from occurring without compromising important democratic values? This book takes a look at how local police perceive and carry out their role in the tremendously complex and demanding field we call 'concern work' (bekymringsarbeidet).
The police face complicated dilemmas on a daily basis: What is the relationship between extreme behavior and expression, and extremist violence? Where are the boundaries between conservative and extreme forms of religion? Is there an appropriate moment for the police to confront persons who have not (yet?) broken any laws?
Concern Work. Police Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism will appeal to researchers and practitioners working with prevention initiatives, and anyone interested in radicalizaion and violent extremism, as well as democracy, freedom of speech and the rule of law. - Hvert år mottar lokale politidistrikter et stort antall meldinger, fra helsevesenet, skoleverket, Nav, diverse lavterskeltilbud, pårørende, naboer eller andre, der det uttrykkes bekymring for at individer eller miljøer kan være i risiko for å være, eller bli, voldelige ekstremister. De fleste av disse utgjør ingen slik fare.
Samtidig har Norge de siste årene flere ganger erfart at ekstremister kan forårsake stor skade, smerte, frykt og død – ikke bare for noen få, men for hele samfunnet. Hvordan skal myndighetene gripe inn i tide for å forhindre at slikt skjer, uten å sette viktige demokratiske verdier i fare? Denne boken utforsker hvordan lokalt politi forstår og utfører sin del av det uhyre komplekse og krevende feltet vi kaller bekymringsarbeidet.
Politiet står i kompliserte dilemmaer i sitt daglige virke: Hva er forholdet mellom ekstreme holdninger og ytringer og ekstremistisk vold? Hvor går grensene mellom konservative og ekstreme former for religion? Når blir det riktig for politiet å intervenere overfor folk som (ennå?) ikke har begått lovbrudd?
Bekymringsarbeidet. Politiets forebygging av radikalisering og voldelig ekstremisme henvender seg til forskere og praktikere i forebyggingsfeltet, og til alle som er opptatt av radikalisering og voldelig ekstremisme, så vel som rettssikkerhet, demokrati og ytringsfrihet.
"This book addresses political conflicts in Norway through an extended time span, from the late autocracy of the 18th century until the democratic challenges of today. The book holds eight articles focusing on historical phases which have been particularly influenced by social and political mobilization. Thus, the book traces an oppositional tradition across borders in time and space. Although the articles are based on limited studies, the authors write with ambition to include their research into this wider context.
In Norway, the Constitution of 1814 marks the shift from autocratic rule to early democracy. 18th century peasant riots may be interpreted as expressions of impotence of the common people, but also as an opportunity for action with the potential to influence the authorities. The 19th century peasant opposition shows the potential for change through parliamentary representation. Around 1850 the first attempts at worker's organizations were criminalized – around 1950, however, the Labour Party dominated Norwegian politics. These trending lines reflect an increasingly developed democracy. The political system is in principle opening for broad popular participation. However, democracy is still being challenged by opposition in ways and by means that occasionally raise concerns about the stability of our political culture.
The book is divided into three parts. Part I is dedicated to the age of late autocracy, part II provides insights into the 19th century democratization processes, while Part III includes articles dealing with opposition and confrontations in the last century, focusing the interwar period, the 1970s, and today's multicultural society.The book is aimed both at researchers, students and the general audience." - "Denne boka tar opp politiske konflikter i Norge gjennom et langt tidsspenn, fra det seine eneveldet til vår tids demokratiske utfordringer. De åtte kapitlene representerer punktnedslag i historiske faser som i særlig grad har vært preget av sosial og politisk mobilisering. Slik bidrar boka til å belyse en opposisjonell tradisjon.
Historikere er blitt kritisert for å fokusere ensidig på avgrensede perioder og hendelser, og være for lite opptatt av å spore linjer på tvers av grenser i tid og rom. Forfatterne av denne boka skriver med bakgrunn i avgrensede studier, men alltid med ambisjon om å sette sine forskningstema inn i en videre kontekst.
I Norge markerer Grunnloven av 1814 skiftet fra eneveldig styre til begynnende demokrati. 1700-tallets bondeopprør kan tolkes som uttrykk for allmuens avmakt, men også som handlingsrom med potensiale til å påvirke myndighetene. 1800-tallets bondeopposisjon viser mulighetene for å nå fram gjennom parlamentarisk opposisjon. Rundt 1850 ble de første forsøk på organisering av arbeidere kriminalisert – rundt 1950 dominerte Arbeiderpartiet norsk politikk. Dette er linjer som speiler et stadig mer utviklet demokrati. Det politiske systemet åpner i prinsippet for bred folkelig medvirkning. Men fortsatt blir demokratiet utfordret av opposisjon i ytringsformer som til tider vekker bekymring for stabiliteten i vår politiske kultur."
