Bergen Journal of Criminal Law & Criminal Justice <p>This open-access electronic journal aims at strengthening the communication between the Nordic criminal law science and the international arena. The main idea is to make Nordic criminal law research available for an international audience, as well as allowing international research to interact with a Nordic audience. Therefore, contributions in English are favoured, but text written in the Nordic languages and in German can be accepted as well. The journal is published with two issues per year, freely available for everyone.</p> en-US <p>Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:</p> <p>Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a&nbsp;<strong>Creative Commons Attribution License</strong>&nbsp;that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.</p> <p>Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.</p> <p>Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.</p> (Jørn Jacobsen) (Bergen Open Access Publishing) Sat, 19 May 2018 00:00:00 +0200 OJS 60 Thoughts on Drug Policy, Public Health, and Crime: More Support for Decriminalization <p>In this paper I describe the nature of my interest in drug policy; discuss questions about whether and why drugs pose a public health problem; present some empirical results that bear on whether drug proscriptions might be justified because of their causal role in contributing to crime; hazard a few observations about how a society should deal with drug problems; and comment on the recent opiate epidemic plaguing much of the United States. My overall conclusion is that a good rationale for drug prohibitions has yet to be found, and the liberal alternative to criminalization, which recommends that drug use be treated as a public health problem, is problematic as well---even though it certainly would be an improvement on the status quo. </p> Douglas Husak ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sat, 19 May 2018 22:10:47 +0200 The Norwegian Criminal Regulation of Drugs: An Overview and Some Principled Challenges <p>This article describes and critically analyses the current state of the Norwegian criminal regulation of drugs. The first parts of the article describe the contemporary rules and Norway’s international obligations in this field of law. The following part addresses the official justification of this regulation. Here, the article scrutinises the official justification for the contemporary regulation, in particular the criminalisation of use and minor possession of drugs. The analysis applies the principle opted for by the Norwegian legislator as a guiding criminalisation principle in the preparation of the Criminal Code of 2005, <em>i.e. </em>the harm principle. The article does not completely reject the possibility for justifying the regulation, but concludes that the contemporary regulation at least rests on an insufficient normative basis. The final section critically discusses the high levels of punishment applied in Norway in the drug context.</p> Jørn Jacobsen, Selma Taslaman ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sat, 19 May 2018 22:10:47 +0200 Decriminalisation of Drug Use – The Outlook for Reform in Norway <p>The article gives an overview on the outlook for a Norwegian drug policy reform. It discusses whether a statement by a majority group in the Parliament might lead to full decriminalisation of drug use and possession of small quantities for own use. It also looks at the moral and sociological background for the drive for a change of the current legal regulation of drug use.</p> Hans Fredrik Marthinussen ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sat, 19 May 2018 22:10:48 +0200 Intoxication and Self-Induced Criminal Incapacity in Norwegian Law <p>This article provides an explanation and analysis of the regulation of criminal incapacity and intoxication in Norwegian criminal law. The current rule on this matter is found in section 20 of the Norwegian Penal Code. This rule is strict and does not require that the defendant was culpable in creating his or her incapacity (or for committing the crime in this condition). The authors explain how this rule has been subject to critique, in particular because it compromises the principle of guilt. On this background, they offer a broader picture of Norwegian criminal law, by examining the alternative solutions found in the Penal Code of 1902 and in the two recent law proposals NOU 2014:10 and Prop. 154 L (2016-2017) – which provide for a shift in focus to self-induced criminal incapacity. The authors argue that the guilt principle must be the guiding perspective for the construction of rules on intoxication and self-induced criminal incapacity. On this basis, they argue that the current rule should be abolished, and that the proposal in NOU 2014:10 is the most adequate alternative, although it is also coupled with some problems. They conclude that the operationalisation of the guilt principle requires a larger engagement in the philosophical debate on the matter than what has so far been the case in Norwegian criminal law.</p> Linda Gröning, Ingrid Marie Myklebust ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sat, 19 May 2018 22:10:48 +0200 Chilling Effect as a European Court of Human Rights’ Concept in Media Law Cases <p>In few of the many cases where the European Court of Human Rights has found a violation of Article 10, the Court has simultaneously stated that a specific restriction or sanction has an actual or a potential chilling effect for press freedom. The Article examines by way of the Court’s case law the notion of ‘chilling effect’. It is concluded that ‘chilling effect’ is a strong notion reserved for cases where something genuine is at stake. The notion points beyond the case at hand and has a negative impact on the applicant’s future task or – in its most severe form – a negative impact on the press as such to the outmost detriment of the public debate, the control of the establishment, and, thereby, to the impairment of society as a whole.</p> Trine Baumbach ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sat, 19 May 2018 22:10:48 +0200