– We are concerned that this does not constitute a financial burden for the student, that she does not have to pay anything for the appeal to the Supreme Court, Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre (AP) said earlier this week.
Støre responded to a question from Dagbladet about why the government chose to appeal the acquittal in the Court of Appeal of a student convicted of cheating after self-plagiarizing.
Dagbladet can now reveal that, at the same time as Støre promised that the government’s appeal to the Supreme Court would not cost the student a penny, the student’s lawyer Magnus Stray Vyrje argued for over a month with the Government Prosecutor to have the legal costs paid. the State was awarded in the Court of Appeals.
In total, the state owes the student NOK 230,000, which includes court costs of NOK 30,000 for appealing to the Court of Appeal.
The deadline to pay was December 15, two weeks after the Court of Appeal pronounced the student’s acquittal.
TERM: Minister of Research and Higher Education Sandra Borch (Sp) is leaving her post as minister after it became known that she submitted a master’s thesis with several steps identical to other students’ assignments. Video: The government Show more
“We can’t leave him like this”
When Vyrje contacted the Government Attorney and requested payment of legal fees on behalf of the student, the Government Attorney responded that they would not pay until the appeal was decided or possibly when the ruling was final.
The government lawyer pointed out that they would eventually pay the student late payment interest for the unpaid legal fees of NOK 230,000.
Vyrje then urgently asked the government prosecutor to have another round with the Ministry of Education.
“The department has no right to impose a loan of NOK 229,832 on my client, in exchange for the payment of arrears of interest. The Ministry cannot really think that she, after being unfairly banned from studying, should co-finance the costs of this fee judicial, why is the state violating the deadline of the Court of Appeal? I ask you to take another round with the ministry. We cannot allow it this way,” Vyrje wrote in an email to the government prosecutor.
The government has been notified
On December 5, the Government Attorney promised that he would take another crack at the Ministry of Education if the student’s legal fees were not paid.
Then there was complete silence from the Government Attorney and the Ministry of Education, then led by the Minister of Research and Higher Education Sandra Borch.
On January 10, the government decided to appeal to the Supreme Court, which was also the starting point of the government’s plagiarism scandal. BI student Kristoffer Rytterager was so angered by the government’s appeal of the student’s acquittal that he examined Sandra Borchs’ master’s thesis.
Less than a day after Ryggerager posted the textual similarities found in Borch’s thesis on Twitter, Borch resigned.
But with the government’s appeal to the Supreme Court, paying the student’s legal costs could take many months, despite Støre’s promises that she will not suffer financially as a result of the case. In the meantime, lawyer Vyrje had to cover the court costs of the Court of Appeal from his own funds.
There will be changes in the government on Tuesday, warns Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre (AP). It takes place in the Palace Cabinet at 10.00. Show more
Shot in less than five hours
However, when Dagbladet asked the Ministry of Education questions on Wednesday afternoon about the 230,000 Norwegian crowns the state owes the acquitted student, the situation accelerated.
At 2.40pm Dagbladet asked the new Minister of Research and Education, Oddmund Hoel, why the Ministry of Education did not pay the court costs it was ordered to pay and what the reasons are for not paying in light of the Støre Laws .
At 7.20pm – less than five hours later – lawyer Vyrje receives a new email from the government prosecutor stating that the Ministry of Education has now decided that the legal costs still have to be paid. So the Ministry of Education owed the student NOK 230,000 for over a month after the December 15 payment deadline.
– The reason why the student has not yet been paid the legal fees is that it is common practice in controversial cases that the legal fees are not paid until the court’s decision becomes legally binding, i.e. until the outcome has been finally clarified . We have made it clear that the student will not suffer any financial burden, regardless of the outcome of the appeal. We therefore believe there is reason to deviate from normal practice and accelerate payments, writes Minister of Research and Higher Education Oddmund Hoel in an email to Dagbladet.
TURNOVER: The Ministry of Education under Sandra Borch (Sp) refused to pay the student’s legal costs, but on the second day of work the new minister Oddmund Hoel (Sp) made a different assessment. Photo: Fredrik Varfjell / NTB Show more
He quoted himself
Hoel also writes that the government took the student into account when he now appealed the acquittal to the Supreme Court.
– I completely understand that it is very challenging for a former student to find himself in such a legal process. This is why we said that the student should not suffer unnecessary harm. We pay all court costs, the student will not have to testify in front of the Supreme Court, and we have agreed to reduce the backlash. The important thing here is to clarify the legal principles, it is important for equal treatment of students in future cases, writes Hoel.
The student who was banned for two semesters for copying reused two paragraphs in a take-home exam from a previous exam she failed. In both paragraphs the student referred to the specialist literature on which she relied.
The student’s attorney believes she followed specific rules for the home exam where limited reuse was ruled legal, while the state believes the student’s reuse violates the institution’s rules against cheating.
It will now be up to the appeal panel of the Supreme Court to decide whether the appeal should be heard.
– Deceptive
Lawyer Vyrje believes that Støre and Minister Hoel are misleading when they emphasize that the student “will not have to” appear before the Supreme Court. Neither the parties nor the witnesses plead before the Supreme Court, so the student will not have to appear regardless of what the government wants or thinks.
Vyrje also believes that the government ignores humane considerations when appealing the case.
– The State has known for a long time that the student collapsed. However, the Ministry of Appeal asked the court to order her to appear personally during the appeal hearing, which the student only experienced as annoying, says Vyrje and concludes:
– The State also presents it so that the Ministry, in any case, covers the student’s legal expenses before the Supreme Court. This is also misleading. The right thing is that, if the State is successful, the Ministry will not cover legal costs for the Supreme Court more than the Ministry itself considers reasonable and necessary. The Ministry attempted to reduce the student’s claim for legal costs in the Court of Appeal, and succeeded.
2024-01-25 18:32:35
#Dagbladet #reveals #Refused #pay