The Export Control Act's penal provision on incorrect information

Supreme Court judgment 13 May 2019, HR-2019-900-A, (case no. 19-007393STR-HRET), criminal case, appeal against judgment.

A (Counsel Bjørn Stordrange) v. The Public Prosecution Authority(Counsel Trude Stanghelle)

Justices: Øie, Endresen, Noer, Arntzen, Berglund

An employee in the Norwegian Armed Forces with responsibility for sale of military maritime materials had been the officer in charge of a sale of seven demilitarised vessels to a English company. A licence is required from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to export material for military purposes to areas with war or conflict or to a country involved in civil war. Under an agreement with the Ministry, the officer obtained a so-called end-user declaration from the English buyer stating this company was also the end-user. When he, before the export, became aware that a Nigerian company was the real buyer and end-user of the vessels, he omitted to inform the Ministry. The Supreme Court found that the omission to rectify the previously submitted end-user information was clearly covered by the penal provision in section 5 subsection 1 of the Export Control Act, which is aimed at anyone giving incorrect information to a public authority in connection with export or application for permission to export. The duty to provide the Ministry with correct information regarding matters of significance to the right to export must apply during the entire period up to the date of export.

Read the whole judgment

Til toppen