Police officer acquitted after use of force in Kongsberg

A police officer used force against two persons during an arrest. One of them refused to comply with the police's orders and resisted when taken aside. To gain control, the officer took him to the ground and struck him in the head and neck with clenched fists. Later, he also used pepper spray and a baton. The other person intervened and tried to obstruct the police's work. He was struck twice on the thighs with a baton when he refused to move away.

The majority of the Supreme Court found that there was much to suggest that the use of force was necessary and justified under the Police Act. In any case, the use of force was not punishable because any potential violation of the Police Act falls within the margin of error that officers must be allowed. It was emphasised that leniency must be exercised in the criminal assessment of the police's use of force. An officer's decision on the level of force required to resolve a situation can be challenging and often needs to be made quickly. Therefore, the choices made by the officer in a pressured situation must often be accepted, even if the use of force, seen from the outside and by those it is directed against, may appear brutal.

After an individual assessment, the majority found that the officer could not be punished for bodily harm or for gross misconduct. Nor could he be ordered to pay compensation, as the use of force was within the scope of lawful authority and justified against those it was directed at.

A minority found that the use of force in this case went too far and was punishable, even with the margin of error that must be considered. The minority also believed that the officer was liable for compensation.

The ruling primarily clarifies the criteria for punishing police officers who use force against individuals who actively resist.

Read the judgment from the Supreme Court (Norwegian only) (PDF)

Areas of law: Criminal law. Tort law. Section 272 see section 271 of the Penal Code, and section 172 see section 171 of the Penal Code. Section 3-5 see section 3-3 of the Tort Act. 

Key paragraphs: 58, 62, 85–86

Justices: Falkanger, Bergh, Sæther, Stenvik, Lund