Keep clear of Norway

[Angelika]

Originally Posted by Navarre

if I walk in Stockolm, who decide that my dog is a wolf, a wolf mix or a dog?

I know what you mean, but just to put in order: you won´t have any problems in Stockholm but in Oslo

[Natalya]

Breed genetic test is not so precise, as personal genetic identification or nearest relatives identification. Veterinary department of Mars Inc. offers DNA breed test for mixed dog owners with 90% accuracy (it is based on gene statistics, collected from 13000 dogs, as they say). But they say in FAQ:
- Can this test be used by regulatory/animal control officials to determine whether breeds are legislated or banned in a particular community? - The WISDOM Panel™ MX is designed and intended to be used solely to identify the genetic history of a mixed-breed dog and no other purpose is authorized or permitted.
But anyway, if judgment is based on presumption of innocence, prosecutor have to give evidences, that suspicious animal belongs to prohibited breed.

[Per Olav]

Originally Posted by Natalya

But anyway, if judgment is based on presumption of innocence, prosecutor have to give evidences, that suspicious animal belongs to prohibited breed.

Nope On the contrary. Like the Norwegian law on drugs the procecuted bear the responsibility of proving earned money come from other sources than distribution of drugs, the owners of assumed banned dogs or mixes thereof are responsible of proving their dogs are not. Theoretically the authoryties may sit with hands and legs crossed waiting for the evidence provided by the procecuted. And again - if there is a slightest doubt of the heritage of a assumed banned dog or mixes thereof its future life may be disputable.
--
PO

[Angelika]

Originally Posted by Natalya

if judgment is based on presumption of innocence

No, Natalya, it´s based on state-determinations.

Again: on the official page of Norway everyone can find a passage about the obligation to introduce his dog while entering Norway. If you follow this obligation nothing happens because they will send you and your dog home.

Does everyone here want to avoid state-determinations?

[Rona]

Well, the problem is different in my opinion - much more philosophical. Namely in some states, some authorities and administrators keep forgeting that law has been created to serve people and protect them and not the other way round. People (policemen, judges etc.) are not robots and should apply legal regulations with the understanding of their deep meaning and purpose that stands behind them. Law without a "humane face" and mercy is a total misunderstanding and a mockery of itslef

[Navarre]

Originally Posted by Angelika

I know what you mean, but just to put in order: you won´t have any problems in Stockholm but in Oslo

ehm...sorry !

[Per Olav]

Originally Posted by Navarre

ehm...sorry !

You're forgiven
--
PO

[Angelika]

Originally Posted by Navarre

ehm...sorry !

Really nice picture - thank you

[Angelika]

Originally Posted by Rona

Well, the problem is different in my opinion - much more philosophical. Namely in some states, some authorities and administrators keep forgeting that law has been created to serve people and protect them and not the other way round. People (policemen, judges etc.) are not robots and should apply legal regulations with the understanding of their deep meaning and purpose that stands behind them. Law without a "humane face" and mercy is a total misunderstanding and a mockery of itslef

You´re right, Rona, as always But I´m too old to be as idealistic as you are

On the other hand I do not doubt the good intention of this determination/law. Unfortunately it was not carried out well. Or an example should have been stated. Who knows? There are not much background informations.

Anyway: this sad situation could have been avoided by the dog´s owner.

[Mikael]

Originally Posted by Navarre

ehm...sorry !

I will forgive you to, but only if you invite me for a cup of Italian coffee

Very best regards / Mikael, Stockholm

[Mikael]

Originally Posted by Angelika

this sad situation could have been avoided by the dog´s owner.

Yes I agree whit Per Olav and you on this point, but did the owners know ??? I do not think the CsV owners of Imbus knew about the risks of going on a holiday to Norway last summer...

And I do not think the crime is of the proportion of death penalty neither...

Maybe 5000 Euro in penalty fine and deportation from Norway would be a penalty more easy to understand but death for the only one of the family members that is absolutely innocent is not OK

Regards / Mikael

[Rona]

Originally Posted by Angelika

You´re right, Rona, as always But I´m too old to be as idealistic as you are

On the other hand I do not doubt the good intention of this determination/law. Unfortunately it was not carried out well. Or an example should have been stated. Who knows? There are not much background informations.

Anyway: this sad situation could have been avoided by the dog´s owner.

Angelika, for me this is no idealism, but common sense. . If my generation had obeyed law in 100%, my country (and many more) would still be communist now . If my grandparents had obeyed Nazi law, their Jewish friends would have been exterminated , etc. I belive there are principles more important than legal regulations - law can be changed, but it won't return Majlo his life.

Don't misunderstand me - I'm all for following legal regulations, for reporting law breaking, for getting informed about regulations in other countries, etc. (NB just yesterday I persuaded my two female students not to join their male friends on a cycling expedition to Iran - at first they didn't belive me and thought I was joking when I told them they'd for sure end upin jail ) But I'm against executing legal absurds.

Killing any creature "just in case" in a democratic country in the 21c - for me is a legal absurd, just as for all those, who signed the petition. Aren't there any lions and tigers in zoos - things happen - they might escape one day! Not to mention all the muggers and murderers walking free in the streets in serach of victims...

[Angelika]

Hi Rona,

I think at last we reach the same conclusion, albeit on different ways

It has been the fault of our generation to educate the present generation to be so "extremely" self-confident. Seems they are thinking: here I come - nothing can stop me - I don´t care about laws or political conditions in foreign countries ...

It would be better to reflect, to inform themselves, to take important things seriously.

That´s why I´m repeating myself again and again (but I assure you of stopping it now ).

Maybe it has been the aim of Per Olav´s topic too.

Kind regards
Angelika

[Per Olav]

I promised to keep you updated on the fate of American Staffordshire Terrier Majlo who the Norwegian Authoryties will put to death because of he illegally crossed the Norwegian border accompanied by his owners. The Norwegian Breed Spesific Legislation states that Amstaffs like CSVs are banned breeds here. Here is the owners home page.

[Rona]

Per Olav, could you please brief us on the present situation of Majlo? By looking through the links provided by Majlo's owners I guessed he was still alive in October, which could be a positive sign and raise some hope?

I received an answer to my letters to the Norwegian Police and Ministry, but they sounded neither optimistic nor promissing, just neutral.

[Per Olav]

Still status quo.
One trial has been held where the judge decided to let Maijlo leave for Sweden. The procecutioner protested and Mailjo is still kept hidden and shelterded, The case is now waiting for a new trial by a higher court.

[Per Olav]

Last update.

The higher court has decided that Majlo shall live. Most likely he will stay in Poland in custody of the owner's brother-in-law.

Thank you all for supporting the Majlo case.

[Mikael]

Originally Posted by Per Olav

Last update.

The higher court has decided that Majlo shall live. Most likely he will stay in Poland in custody of the owner's brother-in-law.

Thank you all for supporting the Majlo case.

to the higher court

Do they still have to pay $$$ for every month the dog was in captivity ??? Or are they and Majlo Free from it all now ???

Best regards / M

[Per Olav]

By now the media do not tell if the owners have to pay the sheltering and the prosecutors may even want to have the case finally solved by the Supreme Court.
--
po

[Rona]

Good news!