Contact ban with reverse violence alarm

Supreme Court judgment of 28 September 2017, HR-2017-1840-A, (case no. 2017/867), criminal case, appeal against judgment 

A (Counsel Marius O. Dietrichson) v. The public prosecution authority (Public prosecutor Nina M. Prebe)

Justices: Bergsjø, Bergh, Ringnes, Webster, Tønder

A person convicted in the court of appeal for violation of the Penal Code 1902 section 132a and for threats against an ex-girlfriend and repeated breach of the restraining order with regard to her, was, as part of the sanction, subjected to a contact ban involving electronic supervision for a period of one year within an exclusion zone covering most of Østfold county and a large part of Akershus county, see the Penal Code 2005 section 57.

The Supreme Court considered the disadvantages the electronic supervision entailed for the convicted person and concluded that the arrangement, despite the substantial limitation of the freedom of movement in addition to the prohibition against being present in a specific area, has sufficient legal basis. Because of the convicted person's repeated and serious violations of the restraining order and contact ban, the Supreme Court agreed with the court of appeal that the necessity requirement was met. The intervention was also not disproportionate when balancing the disadvantages the prohibition entailed against the need for protection of the aggrieved person. The convicted person's appeal against the sentencing was dismissed.

Read the whole judgment