20110111E-Anke-til-Gulating-lagmannsrett-fra-RLH.html

-- 20110111E-Anke-til-Gulating-lagmannsrett-fra-RLH.html --- BREVENE ( intern ) ---- Ang-stevningen-21_10_2010.html ( intern ) --- Politi-anmeldelsene-Index.html ( intern ) --- dbn.html ( ekstern ) --- Dommer-etc-i-saken-Index.html ( intern ) ---

The translation of this document from Norwegian to English is perr 10.02. 2011 not entirely completed yet! Still on the way.
((( norske original-versjon er på denne linken: intern - ekstern )))
RLH: Mailed through e-mail 11.01. 2011, and through ordinary mail with signature to Haugaland District Court little after.

    Appellate

    and request for temporary decision

    to Gulating Court of Appeal

    case no.
    10-167860TVI-HAUG

LAWSUIT: Rune Hansen, Tindeland, 5568 Vikebygd

Counsel: Self Litigant

SUED: Trude Monica Hansen
Skoglandvn. 108
5514 Haugesund

Counsel: Odd Arild Helland
  PO Box 490
  5501 Haugesund

The case concerns: Requirements for permanent residency, visitations and parental responsibility

   I refer to and hereby appeal the judgment 08.12.2010 Haugaland District Court, of district court judge Per Annstein Aarvik
   in case no. 10-167860TVI-HAUG.

   The case concerns decision about permanent residence for, visitations and parental responsibility for seven of the parties ten children together.
   In addition to five daughters and two sons born in the period from 1993 to 2008 as this case concerns, the litigants have three grown children, a son born in 1986, a daughter born in 1988 and a son born in 1991.

The minor children as the issue concern are:

Frøydis Hansen b. 25.12.1993
Staude Sofie Hansen b. 24.05.1997
Alfredo Ao Hansen b. 17.08.1999
Mariel Rose Hansen b. 21.12.2001
Urda Lilje Hansen b. 14.06.2003
Solborg Sera Hansen b. 28.02.2006
Tormod Hansen b. 15.04.2008

   Haugaland District Court issued judgement of 08.05.2009 with conclusion about that mother Trude Monica Hansen alone shall have the parental responsibility and the daily custody for the parties children.
And that the children this case is about shall be together with theyr father, Rune L. Hansen, every third Saturday from 10 am to 4 pm.
This was concidering the same following 7 children:
   Frøydis Hansen, b. 25.12.1993, Sofie Sofie Hansen, b. 24.05.1997, Alfredo Ao Hansen, b. 17.08.1999, Mariel Rose Hansen, b. 21.12.2001, Urda Lilje Hansen, b. 14.06.2003, Solborg Sera Hansen, b. 28.02.2006 and Tormod Hansen, b. 17.04.2008.

   In the court's assessment it is being inter alia said:

  "It is not obtained anywhere in the case something that indicate that the children the case concern have special custody needs. On the contrary, they appear as harmonious, creative and safe. There are no circumstances indicating that the care they have received has caused them any kind of damage. (...) It seems that they have had positive outcomes from their parents' way of life, home teaching and custody. / The court finds that the parties have completed each other, and together stood for this. There is no doubt that the children the case concern are highly related to father and the farm in Vikebygd. There is neither no doubt that they are linked to mother, even if they do not seem to have attached themselves to their new home in the same degree. As the parties no longer live together, the court must consider them separately. Except that the children have been home schooled, the court can not find facts telling that they have been isolated from society. It appears that they were involved in music- and sports activities."

    And regarding residence the court writes inter alia the following:

    "When the children reaches 12 years old it shall be placed big weight on what they mean, see Children Act § 3, second paragraph. Frøydis and Stauda Sofie has expressed a desire to live as much with each parent. Frøydis has now passed 15, while Stauda Sofie is 12 years old. Alfredo Ao, who will be 10 this year, has expressed that he wants to stay in Vikebygd with father. Mariell Rose, who turned 7 last Desember, has also expressed desire to live with father in Vikebygd. The court has considered the children's wishes, but find not to place decisive weight on these."

    Regarding the parental responsibility for the children the court writes inter alia the following:

    "The parents have parental responsibility together. The decision on who should have parental responsibility should first and foremost comply with what is best for the children. The main rule is that parents should have joint parental responsibility unless there are special reasons as say that one parent should have it alone."

    The court writes and decide about the children's right to be together with both parents the following:

    "Children have right to be together with both parents, see Children's Act § 42. In decisions about visitation for to be together shall inter alia be paid to the interests of best possible parental contact, how old the children are, to what extent the children are related to the surrondings, travel distance between the parents and the interests of the children in general. / The court is not in doubt that Frøydis, Stauda Sofie, Alfredo Ao, Mariel Rose, Urda Lilje and Solborg Sera are strongly linked to his father and his home in Vikebygd. They have for the Court stated that they miss their father and the surrondings. As regards Tormod, he is born after mother had moved from Vikebygd. The court considers it would be good for the children to have regular and permanent contact with father. It will set out detailed settlement for visitations for to be together to avoid conflicts between the parents, and so that the assemblage should be predictable for the children. After a concrete comprehensive assessment is court concluded that there shall be a settlement for gathering every third saturday from 10am to 16 pm for these children. The court has emphasized that the siblings should be together with father, that they should have contact with and attachment to father, and that they are close related to his surrondings. / It is possible to set supervise as condition for the right of the assemblage. The court can in special cases instruct the departement to appoint a supervisor cf Children Act § 43, 3 paragraph. In Ot.prp.nr.103 (2004-2005) chapter 10 are told the following:
"The provision is aimed at situations where it is considered as positive for the child to have a certain being together, but where this can not happen without supervision to supervise the child does not suffer from overload. A this kind of supervision is limited to special cases and situations where it is only actual with strongly restricted gatherings. The purpose with a such gathering must primarily be that the child should be familiar with the parent and to ensure a minimum level of contact. This can be of great importance for the child's ability to reality orientation. It is not meaning that the scheme should include interaction of normal size. The scheme will typically be relevant where, for example, there are talking about two to four gatherings per year with a duration of two to four hours each time. "

    This case is not typical for the cases the rule applies. The court yet believes conditions are met. It is been shown to that father is convicted for inter alia to have threatened mother with murder. Although this decision is not legally binded, it is suitable to describe the relationship between the parties. Furthermore, there is need for supervision to ensure that the gatherings is being terminated when they should. The court furthermore show to that there have been big conflicts around the ending of previous gatherings. The Court considers that there is a need for supervision in the handover situations and by the end of the gatherings. Supervisor's role will be to be present during the deliveries. In addition must the supervisor contribute to ensure that the gatherings is being terminated when they should, it can thus be a need for the supervisor is in presence or have contact with father at the end of the gatherings. The court believes it will be need for such supervision the first 20 gatherings. It is assumed that the procedures surrounding the handover then will then be incorporated, and that the level of conflict between the parties will diminish with time.
    Children should not be involved in conflicts between adults, and parents should refrain from referring to the other in negative ways. Although supervision under the gatherings can reduce this risk for this, the court mean that supervised under the entire gatherings will be disproportionate to the benefits. The court also believes that there is too much risk that there will be conflicts between father and supervisor, something which in itself can weaken the quality of the gatherings.
    The court believes the situation is so unique that it is natural to instruct the departement to appoint a supervisory person. The Court will not set guidelines for who should be appointed as supervisor, but would emphasize that there should be a person who is not directly affiliated with child care services. Since child care services is involved in the family, it can be need for to distinguish between child care case and gatherings between father and child.
    The state's supervisor regulatory regime is limited to 16 hours per year, cf. administrative rule for detailed forsagn about the appointment of a supervisor, conduct of the supervision and compensation for this (FOR 2006-12-07 nr 1360) § 2. The condition of supervised holding up even though the time frame is used up. If the public do not want to participate beyond this, must the parties themselves find alternative supervisor arrangements. (...) It shall be supervision under the first 20 gatherings. The Family- and Equality-departement been instructed to appoint supervisor. "

    Father says here and now the following about the court's handling of this case so far:

    The court put no weight on either paternal or the relevant children's legal representation at all. Neither the rights, needs or desires, nor the father's witnesses or evidence. Neither not on contradiction, equality before the law and not on equality. The court remained biased to father and mother, favorable, and the bragging to mother. And the court was false documentarying, and also gagging. And the court was discriminating, insulting and harassing to father.

    This did the court do in a certain degree and on a certain manner with basis in false documentation, terror, staging and threats made and continued by Irene K. Hebnes, head of the local child care- and social-service in Vindafjord. This from Irene K. Hebnes's side towards me and my entire family from 13. March 2006. When Trude kidnapped, captived and gagged our children 03. April 2008 - in violation of The Children Act, General Sivil Penal Code and ECHR and the Human Rights Act, and aggravated punishable - it was only because she felt threatened to it by Irene K. Hebnes and her own at that time lawyer Trond Hjelde. From about then on Trude felt threatened to continue Irene K. Hebnes criminal agenda, which Trude increasingly from then on felt more and more then threatened to - for to "save the children from Irene K. Hebnes / the child care." She was even cheated and threatened to do so by her own lawyer Trond Hjelde. Gradually, also by the child care-services in Haugesund, instructed directly and indirectly by Irene K. Hebnes.
    These are facts and circumstances I can prove solid. What I do at all writing and have written, especially to and towards the court and our Government, are facts and circumstances I solid can prove. Besides I have complete audio recordings of inter alia almost every of the trials in the whole of the case-complex.

    That inter alia the court and other Government-bodies in Norway automatically and uncritically assume that the case presentations from public and local child care is true and correct documentation and purpose (which it is in reality on no matter no places benefits to protest on), it is the normal.
Irene K. Hebnes sole intention was from the beginning in 2006 that father Rune L. Hansen shall be terminated (done to-nothing). And this have in whole this case-complex unambiguous and generally been the straight-line for all involved representatives for the Norwegian authorities. Not least in court. All and any have from their side been manipulated and deliberatet this purpose. The network of criminals representatives for the Norwegian authorities have through long time besides in general in Norway established routines and coordinated-ness for harassment, discrimination, terror, torture and outplundering - as towards the victims often continuous progress over many years. The victims are very many more than me and my children and our family.
    The starting point is harassing false documentation, which continuing and on-plusses from section to section - and as it being manipulating with.

    Nearly all - practically all - the judges who have been involved in this case-complex, both before and after the verdict 08.05. 2009, has behaved as I have described here towards me and my family. Not only the judges in the District Court Haugaland, but also in Gulating Court of Appeal and the Norwegian Supreme Court. In relation to this and with the same purpose and methods have the court also manipulated inter alia with "the parental responsibility" and "the daily custody" for our children. The real purpose have in line with this also been that neither the visitation gatherings or contact between father and children shall be able to take place. So it is also easy to see that is the intention from the district court judge Per Annstein Aarvik's side in the verdict now dated 08.12. 2010. It is easy enough to read and to understand that it from his side is harassment and disdainful insult that really says: Father and children shall never ever more have contact with each other or be together with each other. Period. One must be fairly stupid for to be able to interpret district court judge Per Annstein Aarvik's judgement differently. Otherwise, he is also fully aware that mother Trude and Irene K. Hebnes and co-players's intention is that father shall be terminatet (done to-nothing).

    Regarding the subpoena 21.10. 2010 to Haugaland District Court:

    Lawyer Tone Linn Thingvold handed in on behalf of father to Haugaland District Court lawsuit by 21.10.2010 ( ekstern ). Concerned permanent residency, visitations and parental responsibility for the 7 children concerned. Where it inter alia is stated to be present special reasons after Children Act § 64 for to chang Haugaland District Court's judgement of 08.05. 2009. The reason for this summons was the continuos ongoing kidnapping of the children with capturity and gagging of them - and what this implicated of outplundering, mistreatment and alienation of them. And that neither I or the children yet were taken seriously. That this continiuos was ongoing so long and far and with so clear intention - this did early on the way after the kidnapping 03. April 2008 more and more that my fear for to lose the children, and they theyr father, their integrity, identity, school, home, our life-values, heritage, family, etc. increased.

    At the end of Desember 2009 ((rlh, correction 09.02.2011: at the end of Desember 2010)), I had to cognisant that the children now are deprived the most of this, among them their father and I deprived my children and the life's right.
    My worry for this and protest against it have I performed for the court and other representatives for Norwegian authorities. Inter alia I say in dated 24.11. 2010 to Children-, youth- and family-department (Buf) the following:

    "I have in covenant with mine and the familys central life-values all along the way in this case-complex on course view expressed myself in covenant with the elementary common human values, protections, rights, responsibilities and obligations as is contained in the Human Rights Act, which is and should be over-ordinal current law and right in Norway. / The involved representatives for Norwegian authorities and the court in Norway have all the way along in this case-complex refused to take to consideration that Norway is bound by the central international conventions on the most elementary common human values, protections, rights, responsibilities and obligations. As the court nor has shown respect for the Norwegian Penal Code, and neithet not the Norwegian Constitution. And neither not sub-ordinal laws. But has, in cooperation with among others the County District Commitee and the so-called Child care service, inter alia consistently manipulated with sub-ordinal laws and rules as well as false documentation for to injury our family. The intention has been in full criminal madness to terminate father in the family, the undersigned. (...) The court has allowed the so-called child care service ravage with our entire family, with the children not at least. This both could and should the court have put a stop to. Instead, the court have been harassing and grossly injurying and manifested, maintained and continued criminal intent. / The court has both closed eyes to and stimulated and contributed to staging, house-inquisitions, kidnappings, prison hold, gagging and harassment, threats and terror in and with false documentation. / With lies and threats from Irene K. Hebnes in the local child care service here in Vindafjord and a so-called expert witness report she ordered as the only basis has this case-complex forwarded exceeded in more and more aggrieved and criminal insanity. / False documentation which in both the starting point and further the way was no grounds to believe in as anything else than fraud. / The most of this and more to I have expressed to the court all along the way, in writing, without getting any response to it other than more and further harassment. / The Court has continually acknowledged with criminal judgments and decisions and intentions ( ekstern ). Judgements that for several reasons, not even really are legally bounded. Among much else because my appeals is denied without justification. Without justification, but with harassment, disdainful insults, blackening - and criminal continuation of the kidnapping and prisonhold of the children. / The case-complex went on such way to the top in the Norwegian legal system, to Norway's Supreme Court. Otherwise, fairly one-sided and completely treated only by female judges, a total of about 10 pieces. / The kidnapping, prisonhold, gagging, harassment and outplundering of the children, and also of father, have the involved representatives for Norwegian authorities on various serious criminal ways shown all the way along maintained and continued. And the children's mother, Trude, has along the way more and more allowed herself to be threatened and rewarded to participation in this. / I have not been able to accept neither to be deprived the parental responsibility or less than equal conditions for my children. Whatever the children's mother or others do. / I have not been able to accept that the children and I am being deprived of our rights for granted. Anything else would be serious criminal injustice and gross violation. / I worked intensely and in hope about that the judiciary and the authorities in Norway should temper and put in order themselves and let the children and our family get justice, restoration, security and equality. It did not happen and has not yet happened. I decided along the way to also work to make the case-complex presented for among others, and in particular the Human Rights Court in Strassbourg. I have since the beginning and the kidnapping began continuously worked with and for this. In the same time with all of the criminal assault our family has been exposed to. That I at all even yet have survived under such terror, and not given up, is no matter of course. / I realized along the way, as I said, that I and my children risk to lose each other, that the crime would be accomplised, that they along the way more and more become others, strangers's children. Unless Norwegian authorities - or the Human Rights Court - can and reach to put an end to the criminal madness. I have now had to put up along a limit towards myself. It is set to 23.12. 2010. Have the children not come home before this date I acknowledge to have lost my children, that they no longer are my children (other than in biological sense), that the crime was consummated and I and the children lost. Children deprives their father and I deprives my children. Inter alia. I have long refused me for putting such a limit and has also pushed it as far as possible in the future. But there it goes and stands now. / Up as far as this it is now still nothing else to hear from the courts or representatives for Norwegian authorities, also Buf, than disdainful insults towards me and the children - and clearly manifested given further intentions. / As this respond Haugaland District Court also now ( ekstern ) on a from my side dated 21.10. 2010 filed appeal and request for interim ruling ( ekstern )."

   I refer to this my letter dated 24.11. 2010 to Buf-department. And insert it here now as an attachment and evidence:
   -- 20101124-to-BUF-from-RLH.html

    More concerning to be together, quote from the above mentioned letter 24.11. 2010 to BUF-agency:

     "I confirmed in my letter to you yesterday that I for my part wish implementation of the courts order about visitations. That is otherwise what I since the beginning has wished and tried to get to. / When it comes to your proposal about to link statements to your letter of 28.09. 2010, so I write and sending a letter to you even today. This here now. At least, to say the following: / You write that it is the childrens "non-residental parent" who shall "enquire request to the family counseling and request that the court's orders shall be executed." / To this it is from my side different to say. To be together and contact with both their parents are under the Human Rights Act a right that the child have. When the court in the judgement went to the step to disclaim me both day care and parental responsibility for my children, is it from my side expected that the one the court imposes to maintain the parental responsibility for the child also take care of the childs right, wishes, interests and needs. This is not, however what mother Trude Monica Hansen has done. Neither what concern this the childs right or otherwise what concern essentials. However, she has actively done the opposite, since she 03.04. 2008 kidnapped, held captive and gagged our common children. Her will and purpose has been to terminate the children's father, in accordance with war-implementation from the so-called public child care service that attacked our family. For this she has been both threatened and rewarded, and therefore done and said any and everything they have requested and expected. From these same individuals also our children have been harassed and threatened. That has the whole family been, and each one reacted differently on. And the consequences have been outrageous for us all. / Both Idun and Frøydis and others have, in both my and all my children`s strong desire, all the way along after the judgement offered to bring the children back and forth for visitations for to be together. This is not contrary to the judgement. This has Trude not at all been interested in or open for. At the same time, she has all the way with such diverse agents gagged, harassed and threatened the children in relation to their father. / The reason for my many attempts to get visitation scheme for to be together implemented as the judgement say, is not that I consider the judgement to be right and proper. The judgement I have appealed all the way, until the Norwegian Supreme Court. And I have all the way received harassing and unfounded refusal. My filed police-reports has neither not being taken seriously. On the contrary. Both for these reasons and more, I am about to present the case-complex for inter alia and in particular the Human Rights Court in Strasbourg. There is from representatives from Norwegian authorities not only terror and an attempt to terminate that has happened and yet progress towards our family. It is a multiple murder, both towards the children and their father. And it's completely insane that representatives for Norwegian authorities can carry out such deeds. And it has been and it is from end to end completely at variance with virtually everything and every of law and right. At least, contrary to many of Europe Convention and the Human Rights Act. / The reason for my many attempts to get the visitation arrangement in the judgement implemented, has been and is the realization of that the children along the way are being estranged and becomes others, strangers children. And the work for not to lose my children and the life's right, and on behalf of the children that they not shall derives their father, their integrity, their identity, our life-values, their homestead, their heritage and their school. Since the children were kidnapped, held captived and gagged 03.04. 2008 this has rightly worried me more and more. I have also since the beginning been aware of precisely the destruction of the children's father has been intended. A purpose as is stated very clearly in all and everything that has happened. / The visitation arrangement for to be together in the judgement I have wanted implemented because it could contribute to that the alienation of the children did not happen as quickly and easily. Also to prevent that father and children not lost each other and to reduce the outplundering. The whole everything that has happened in the case-complex has from the beginning been savage ongoing intervention in children's and father's life and integrity in the form of continuous ongoing expression of coarse terror and criminal insanity."

   A little about fathers and children's school, upbringing and life values:

   Me and my family have previously been persecuted and harassed. The reason to that I and my family was persecuted and harassed from 1992 (and 1991) and beyond, was that we then announced that we have chosen to have home school for our children.
   The reasons for this is our choice I gave in different ways both orally and in writing. Such as for example in this letter to the School executive's office in Skaun municipality (in Sør-Trøndelag county), dated Poesihaugen, 24. mai, 1993 ( external ):

   "Refer to our contact with you and with the principal at Jåren-Råbygda school earlier this year, regarding the issue of schooling for Balder Hansen. / We have found that the relevant municipal schools here in Skaun not are appropriate for Balder Hansen, that his upbringing and education shall continue here at home, without the general walk to some of the municipal schools. / This deliberatived over more than seven years, since before he and the rest of our kids were born, and concerned the possibilities of in different ways. The educational opportunities and the enjoyment and well-being the children have at home is so superior with respect. to the all-round quality and the future opportunities that are present professionally and in every way, that the case is definitely clear and simple, - both what concern the educational, the social, the moral and welfare purposes. / For us, the quality of the municipal schools in Skaun and how they are arranged simply are not good enough. We are self competent to give so much more and better, and have so good conditions to facilitate that, too. This is not said in arrogance or haughtiness, but mostly told in confidence and to ourselves, both as parents and experts, and as a family. / We have examined the ability of the children in the family might be able to use any of the schools in the municipality by their 7-year-age and onwards, particularly with respect. to Balder, - but came up with the aforementioned conclusions and this understanding. There are so many things that argue against letting children go in the public schools here, for our concern, - and so much that speak for that that the cases and conditions with respect. to the educational and what the school is meant to be - that this happens as we wish. / We do not need and do not wish the offer that these schools are. It's too bad, unfortunately, in relation to the quality and the opportunities they have at home. We understand very well that other families most are in need and use for these schools. We have it not. In the same way that most people need, use and depend on them. For us it is just not so. In the same manner as we neither not did when each of the three children were born had the use of public hospitals and their maternity wards, but Rune was midwife for they all, and the last two were born at home. It would have been much wrong if all or most people would do it that way, because of that they have use for hospitals and are dependening on their help. For us it was and it is thus not so. Not when it comes to the school system either. / Now we expect and hope for understanding and tolerance of this our attitude and sense of responsibility, - that you or the municipal administration do not wish or will cause problems where there are no problems in this respect. At the same time, we will once again make you aware of, and repeat, that social-leader Olav Høstad by Skaun social-office, actively has driven terror and harassment of our family as has been going on without clarifying in more than nine months now. This is for information."

In another letter dated 31.07. 1993 to the same (external), I write and tell about that "there is absolutely nothing in favor of sending him" to the public, municipal school and states further inter alia: "There is not speak about to deprive him opportunities, but to give him opportunities. To be in a public school environment with many adults and children, of course can give social training and development, but this is not an argument against our position, because it is rather not a problem. (...) Our attitude in this case is as said not intended to impair or diminish Balder opportunities, safety, wellbeing and competence now or later in life, but on the contrary increase and better all this, which we regard as very necessary and important."

   Homeschool otherwise I have written differently about and worked daily with in course of the years.

   The main purpose with the Norwegian primary legislation is that children should be able to benefit and become beneficent citizens in home and community. This both has been and is the purpose and the purpose-paragraph of the Norwegian Primary School Act. It is both the primary purpose of the Act, and for the education or the school.
It is of course the parents or inserted guardians who have the primary responsibility for the childrens upbringing and education.
   And a much sentral element in the Human Rights Act that it places great emphasis on parents right to ensure upbringing, formation and education for their children in accordance with parents' own moral, religious and philosophical convictions.

I reproduce here in that respect the Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms / Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950, Article 2:
"Right to Education: No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."
  And the Human Rights Act Appendix 4, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights / International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 13 Paragraph 3, which says approximately the same:
   "The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions."
And also the Human Rights Act Appendix 6, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of protocols / International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 18 Paragraph 4, which states that:
   "The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions."

The aim of the child's upbringing and education is expressed in the following way, in the Human Rights Act Appendix 8, Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Article 29 Paragraph 1:
"1. States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to:
(a) The development of the child's personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;
(b) The development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations;
(c) The development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own;
(d) The preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin;
(e) The development of respect for the natural environment. "

   These are all relations that always have been important and central for me what concern home-school and my children. For the terrorist regime that has persecuted, harassed, terrorized and tortured me and my family it have been completely opposite.

   A few notes regarding cultural collision, heritage and life values:

   It's not just kids' unique, irreplaceable, fertilerich, content-rich home, archives, libraries, manuscripts and school that is being destroyed and is being lost, robbed from them, but also approximate their entire valuable, life-important inheritance, life values and integrity, and more.
   Those there criminal nonsense-hens that do they self to criminals in a terrorist regime understands microscopic little or nothing of that sort of something. They think, their self alike, on heritage as such as money and physically, material objects. Because they are complete poor people in this matter, that have nothing to give their children and grandchildren or community in heritage. Than perhaps at it best, something as wretched as any monetary sums and IKEA furniture. Spiritual-poor poor cage hens as they are. Even their own children are of little value for them. And with-people, of course. And culture, decency, landscapes, history, perspectives, sweetness, cognitive, mental and spiritual treasure chambers. They simply do not have such something, and understand it simply not. Other than at best in a very limited sense and meaning.
   So what well do is does if they deprive our familie and our children all such something, which they perhaps even might despise! Or not even know about the existence of!
   They belive themselves as well even as richer and better than the children's father and the familys values, and justified to destroy and to terminate what they regard as inferior and worthless. Because they believe themselves to have something better: prisonhold, kidnappings, document-false, harassment, intimidation, violations, terror, vandalism and destruction - its methods and standards! What do they really care about human rights, constitution, criminal law and such something scrape? It is scrape and worthless for they - also that too. They are the almighty assess- and opinion-mafia! The criminal, life-dangerous asses- and opinion-mafia. They have neither love, care, wisdom, understanding, safety or well being to give - neither to their own children or others. They are the falseness dangerous criminals dozen goods! But if they so had or have anything to give, - so they then rather then must sow, harvest, enjoy and spread around their own fruit!
   It ravages such with my children that I indeed cry at the mere thought.
   And all and the whole all because of a so-called child care service and its criminal co-players! In Norway, is indeed about much turned upside down! To the horror the opposite of what it in actual fact is ment to be! Murder, terror, harassment, kidnapping, document-false, etc., is prohibited and punishable. No matter who does it. Is there anyone who has not understood enough yet?!

   A note from Rune L. Hansen 20.03. 2010:

   "In and for our family, I have for what we concern competent always been quality-oriented, historically and culturally in time and space. We have applied and used the best qualities from the world's treasure chambers, with the most complete naturalness of the world. In and for our life values. For example, especially Indian music, song and dance
qqq
were central and of great significance for us. Simultaneously with the best qualities from allspice western songs and music, as we have in our great skattkammers library and archive. The best of the best recordings from from Duke Ellington, Giuseppe Verdi, Mozart, Bach, vice-song, different countries' folk music, contries & western, horn-music, etc. All of course in all sounds and idylls from God's great and fertile creation expression of beauty, joy and truth. / What comes to film the love has gone especially in the direction of especially Chinese, Indian and Asian, and then and iøvrig particular historical and epic movies. such things we have always seen a lot and been very happy in. The best of old- future of Jackie Chan and Jet Li for example, what the Chinese in question the love. Also, for example, Japanese Akira Kurosawa, of course. And Bengali, Farsi, and more. To a great extent the same in terms of poetry, literature and books and art, acrobatics, science, tradition and culture. but not least our Western countries and cultures treasures, pearls and traditions, such as Richard Attenborugh, Mary Poppins, James Uyis Gods Must Be Crazy, the House on the Prairie, Dr. Quinn, etc.! / The best qualities - the global historical perspectives and traditions. In and of our innocence, happiness and well-being, in and for our values, work, studies, dreams and longings. This and such and so much else - and especially for us and our - has been and is our lives, environments and life values. Page Current iøvrig for example, with many different rich units of scientific studies, craft and work. Not the least in direct relationship with the land capers KRINK and hooks and lush named. / What you know well or recognize good people such as Irene K. Hebnes, Anne Stern Hoff, Ødegaard and Per Schnabl - or for that matter, Annie grunt Kristiansen's - about our life and life values? Almost absolutely nothing! (Annie and her family also believe themselves to know, but know with really really small.) / I would here in the past now, move quickly to say a few words about this and that. Also, all those things which concern the main show this case the complex. / It is evening and I sit maybe to watch a movie. / A is both a wiser and better person from watching movies and reading books of good quality. And one looks better what reality looks like, and feel and experience what-people in all kinds of time and space trying to pass with-people and society. / And all of unfold in joy, curiosity, enthusiasm, innocence and enjoyment! / Trude has never cared particularly about such things. She's only in and with joy and pride valued presence. But what comes to people who For example, Irene K. Hebnes Stern and Anne Hoff, so I'm sure that in relation to us is so extreme that illiterate people to work, such as bottom sludge in cognition proletariat. They know neither how reality should be or is. And this I say absolutely not for insulting them. They insult themselves and reality. insult all and any relating to human behavior and law to do. "

   A note from Rune L. Hansen 09.04. 2010:

   "Our past, our parents and our forefathers and persistent investments and all our work over the years, all we have built up, about to be gone away in the madness of Irene K. Hebnes and her assistants! Together with our integrity and identity, and our legal and our talents. / Spring the contemporary, all our safety, happiness, prosperity and identity, all our confidence, sense of justice, life values, peace and tranquility, proximity environment, financial strength, full of culture clash - by Irene K. Hebnes and her assistants their lies and their standard: In the foreign-empowerment, retraining, destruction, violation, terrorism and torture. / Our future, our hope and optimism for prospects, plans, desires, dreams, all our expression, our family, Our home, our taxes and tax chambers, our standards, our possessions, our roots, away away, cut off, destroyed, by Irene K. Hebnes strangers and their lies, dreams and desires, "and had to be replaced by whom, and when! / Our life right, denied by whom and what?! / And with what right?! / abuse, terrorism, harassment, torture and Gagging law?! / If we have to live Iren K. Hebnes his life? Or had to- nothing done? / The madness right?! / It is in times like this many believe that child rearing is dependent on luck, not on proximity, care, presence, wisdom, confidence, trust and accountability! / They're wrong . And all the world's socialization or care waiver or trickery does not help to correct the error. "

   A note from Rune L. Hansen 25.05. 2010:

   "We were deprived of life's right, both outplundered and made worthless. Our heartfelt satisfaction, our studies, our treasure chambers, our love, our conscience, joy, our future, past, the contemporary, our integrity, our identity, our life, our home, our school, our entire inheritance and life values we lived for, and together we refined, our whole family and family values, all and everything was destroyed, outplundered and destroyed - by specifically those who took it all from us, people who are not even notices or appreciates it and such, or with-human culture, roots, integrity and identity. / It was just miserable remnants and her dying crumbs left by the whole everything. Anything and everything was from-robbed us and destroyed by the poor criminals, poor and wretched and for the most part. The proud, poor-limbs, which nærsagt had and have only poor dozen goods and misery to give and to show off! / Instead, we were involved in a vast criminal history, which with- people behaved like monsters, "and from" looted everything and it all and tried killed and destroyed done! What of us who survive are still not easy to say. It will be whatever might only crumbs and leftovers. / Behind the words to me as further -bring at least this crime story looks and discovers you my children and fellow human beings remains of my heart and through shadows and crumbs of it all everything was from-stolen us and destroyed! / This was unfortunately a crime story from its humble beginning, a crime documentary from the real world. It surpasses most in this respect: he has the least of all missing villains, suspense, intrigue, terror, torture and murder. And it is still in progress. I saw this evening a spectacular film that acted about such things. This our crime story beyond the lavish and the most! / Miracles will now to to be able to restore our lives and save our innocence and integrity development! Daddy do fervently as best he can and powers all the way! With all my health , my life and everything. Never be not at any time in any doubt about that. "

   A note from Rune L. Hansen 26.05. 2010:

   "Integrity, heritage, culture, values, identity - they do not even know what sort of thing is: They think there is anything whatever, here and there, neither one or other of the special value, at least not in relation to their own . They think that our life, our life, their life, all things and all more or less goods and dozens of little or no special value! items they can move on and abuse as appropriate, to retrain and raising of Donald Duck and Labor ideology on drivers and create holders, including greedy for a job to endure! / They are poor-limbs, toms none, who believe themselves to have something, dozen-goods, but more or less complete lack of respect for the common human values, with-man and human dignity: they are cognition and suffering bewildered and confused proletariat. / Integrity, heritage, culture, values, identity - they do not even know what this something is, give the power and responsibility and they are murderers and worse: they either ask or are caring - they believe themselves to have the answers. They are currently the most popular or profitable dozen-care-answers. / They think one has to go or sent to a public office or a factory-fencing to find themselves and trying to get a life. Reality lavishly large and lush book, wisdom and learning is so natural that they do not see or heed it. How could they well could - they are as cut, down-trodden, over-trampled flowers, shrubs and trees, without nærsagt heritage and roots. Illiteracy. Crow-toe, they can barely read, see or understand. And what do they really about anything else? / They care about they are currently the most popular or profitable dozen-care-answers. That their poetry. As they believe to be the only one who has heeded and understood: they are as Babel tower, - and top up there and nedefter runs the noise, commotion , confusion, and scroll-scroll, which they barely even know any thing any time off. And what do they do you? A neatly facade to survive amongst the other dozen-goods is often enough for them. They have little of the other values. That they think it is for us too. They want the rest of us should be interchangeable objects - their objects, their life! To scramble to care of anything or something similar values. The fact that our lives and with people-and what they have and what they yearn after and based on small and wretched values. The proud, dangerous tower of Babel. destroyers, and destruction create holders. Neither seeing, hearing or listening. "

   A bit more about the persecution and history:

   Torture is often in a limited time-perspective sets just are not physically violent, but is it in different ways, or seen in an extended time perspective. Ways and reverberations that among other things may seem physically destructive and destroyed-making. Often, the intent of the person or persons who torture is to hide most of all the physical expression and effects of torture, especially in and for a limited time-space. Torture by the psychological and social are no less serious and may seem even more both devastating, painful and destroyed-making. Through various forms of harassment, violation, blackening, terror, isolation, etc.
   Although I have almost 5 years now living under intense and continuous ongoing torture. Via just different forms of harassment, violation, blackening, terror, isolation, etc. And it has my children too.
   Many will not survive such things and many much damage permanent or irreversible. How long a hold out and the degree of damage may vary. This is dependent on several factors.

   These now almost 5 years is not the first time I've been living under torture. The first time, if I did not expect the first time ever, began in Norway in 1991 and 1992, nearly 20 years ago, and lasted at that time particularly noticeable for about 5 years. 5 years as we, I and my wife, then along the way documented, and survived. We were both at that time very hærjet with, harassed and persecuted, but protected as a first-priority good and successful for our kids. In particular, I, who had to take the heaviest loads to protect the family and that we would be left alone, was very physical hærjet and worn out in these years. The documentation was iøvrig name "Modern sadism". Then we got, however, confidence, peace and quiet for about 10 years, until 2006 when foråret we again were threatened and attacked and way of relating to threats and attacks. But the 10 safe years in a kind of inner exile, I worked on with documentation in relation to what we had been subjected, as well as rehabilitation of our health, safety and well being. Which was very successful and well, even physical and mental health-wise. But the longer we should therefore not be left in peace.
Had I not had the experience of the first 5 years we were persecuted, I had less able to deal with things that were begun in 2006. I would among other things, and especially not equivalent to having managed or seen clearly enough the importance of thoroughness with regard to safeguarding documentation and evidence in relation to what happened.    When the threats, terror and torture was again inserted to us in February-March 2006, the center of a child's birth (Solborg Sera, 28.02. 2006), we were able to continue to protect the children for a while, but our oldest son Balder that when ( 22.03. 2006) was 20 years. He was 13.03. 2006 in a meeting in Vikedal in our community (external) of the attacker, which I here would describe as Irene K. Hebnes and her co-players, harassed on the coarsest as well as the entire family on the roughest and further worse and worse were harassed and threatened. Balder was there and then put up against the rest of the family and then remains opposed and attacked the family getting worse and worse, what he way behind the scenes among others were joined by the children's grandmother on, Unn Skjærvik, living in Trondhjem.
   It was pretty fast and more and more clear way, that the whole Iren K. Hebnes his intention was to terminate the children's father, whatever the costs and methods.
   In particular, extremely severe, it was all because we are in the middle of January 2008 received a copy of the case presentations dated 13.12. 2007 from Irene K. Hebnes to the County District Commitee in Rogaland, where she with false documentation and harassment asking the County District Commitee to deprive us of our children (external). As well as my wife, Trude, and afterward, 03 April 2008, to give Irene K. Hebnes what she wants, kidnapping, prisoner holding and gag all of our children.
   What after the kidnapping of our children 03. April 2008 occurred in a very very harsh flood of criminal insanity, can be described as extreme abuse and torture to both me and the children.
   This has not been Iren K. Hebnes alone. She had and has a network of criminals and the criminal methods at their disposal, in the public administration and with the complicity of others. A network of criminals from the top, ministries, in several aspects and instances nedefter.
   This network runs on a large scale with barnerov, kidnapping, capture and hold gagging of children. Under the particular guise of false documentation and a false "child care" and false "alone-mothers". Such child-robbery has been and is a big industry in Norway.
   Among the many monstrous consequences are particularly extreme abuse and terror, harassment and torture against children and parents.
   What happened and that is also happening to me and my children. For my own person, I have seen such a day had to deal with it for almost 19 years, but under extreme ductile-torment and torture in an extreme spissrot-time of terror, harassment and threats for nearly 5 years and then even more particularly in recent two years while also the smallest of seven children across have been harassed, threatened and hærjet with.
   Documented throughout, evidence, not least also reveal the false evidence, yes, I have thoroughly and in abundance.
   And very many more than me.
   The problem remains, that least of all the criminals want this to come to light in the public eye for fair legal treatment. And that they are concerned with the criminals and their players are numerous and very powerful together.

   It does not help whatever one wants or priorities if not we can have law and order enforced and stop criminals in the public and the administration!

   After Solborg birth and the meeting in Vikedal with the office of Irene K. Hebnes in February-March 2006, we felt more and more threatened with death and I had to down-prioritize a lot and gradually more and more of everything else. Similarly, what happened in 1992 when the roughness of the attack then it was a fact and had taken on very seriously. My task particularly as the father was and is, among other things, not least to safeguard and protect the family. In and for our family, this has been the natural, that children and family to enjoy themselves in safety, happiness and prosperity.
   Especially since the middle of January 2008, but also especially after what happened in December 2006 and 08 January 2007, had from my side nærsagt everything else down a priority in order to defend our families. The conditions and the attacks had been and was more and more broadly characterized by terror, harassment and torture. And when Trude 03 April 2008 with the help and support from the Balder and what I describe as "kidnap-gang" kidnappet all of our children and held prisoner gagged and they had reached a climax. What happened then and thereafter became more and more intense and damaging to the children and characterized by the criminal madness, terror, harassment and torture.
   From the children were kidnapped 03 April 2008, the tears and the pain was intense and continuous present for my part, while the approximate absolute all my work and life every day and every moment has continuously acted to get the children back home and to stop the criminal madness. Not least in the knowledge that Irene K. Hebnes and her co-players or else to fill the burden of the planned, ongoing and intentional crime. To-do nothing to the children's father, integrity, identity, values, heritage, school, home, etc.
   A crime that was absolutely nærsagt consummated in December 2010. Because of and as a consequence of what we have been exposed and the time that has elapsed. The devastation was so complete irreversible.

   It is not without reason I have compared this and the reality of this with a multiple murder and worse.
   It is also not without reason that the Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code Section 223 (a chapter about "Crimes against personal liberty") is law-determined the following:
   "§ 223. Any person who unlawfully deprives another person of his liberty or who aids and abets such deprivation of liberty, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. / If the deprivation of liberty has lasted for more than one month, or has caused any person abnormal suffering or considerable injury to body or health or has resulted in the death of anyone, imprisonment for a term of not less than one year shall be imposed. / Anyone who conspires with anyone about to commit an act referred to in the second section shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years."

That 1 month according to the law in § 223, are a crass serious borderline for danger. Which i also assume is the apprehension of the main emphasis of the international society. Also what regards frames of sentencing.

   The Norwegian General Penal Code 20, chapter - of "crime of Concern for Family Matters" is law-determined the following, in § 215:
   "Any person who with improper intent attempts to deprive another person of the family status to which he is entitled or to acquire for himself or another person a false family status, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six years. If there are especially extenuating circumstances, fines may be imposed. / This provision shall not apply in determining paternity pursuant to the Children Act."

   Thus, a further tightening of the criminal context. Including further states in § 216:
"Any person who causes a minor to be unlawfully deprived of or kept deprived of his parents' or other concerneds' care, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. If there are extenuating circumstances, fines may be imposed. A public prosecution will only be instituted when requested by an aggrieved person."

   And again in § 218:
"Any person who / 1. employs a child under 16 years of age who is in his care or subject to his authority in a way that is harmful to the child's health, morals, or integrity, or permits such employment, or / 2. by misuse of his authority causes any person under 18 years of age who is subordinate to him to be employed in such a manner, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. Any person who misleads or incites another person to commit any of the acts referred to above shall be liable to the same penalty."

   And again in § 219:
   "Whoever by threat, force, restrict freedom of movement to, violence against, or otherwise violate, gross or repeated abuse / a) his former or present spouse / b) his or former or present spouse's relative in right descending line, / c) their relative in the ascending straight line, / d) someone in their household, or / e) someone in their care / / shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. / If the maltreatment is severe or the victim as a result of the action death or serious injury to body or health, the penalty is imprisonment for up to 6 years. In determining whether the maltreatment is serious, particular attention should be to whether it has lasted a long time and whether there are circumstances referred to in § 232. / Any person who aids and abets such an offence shall be liable to the same penalty."

   The Norwegian Penal Code is built-agree that this is very serious conditions and crimes, and all have good, appropriate proportions of this need not be in doubt.

   I refer here now the Norwegian Penal Code particularly important provisions regarding particular kidnapping, capture and hold Gagging of children. Because these and this is in addition to compensation is an important element in terms of restoration.
   The individual criminals and co-offender's personal criminal responsibility is an important element in terms of necessary restoration. Oh Forbis on so this will be a variety show gross injustice.

   What me and my children and my family relating to the crime was consummated. We lost in the sense that we failed to prevent this.
   I work now therefore be necessary for optimal restoration and replacement.
   Of course I have no choice like that seen.

   30. December 2010 I wrote the following note:

   "Threats, for a father or mother, to be deprived of their children, or for a child to be deprived of their father or mother, is in itself of terrorism and torture. For a father or mother worse the less alienated he is. And worse the more one understands the threat seriously and reality. As a child I experienced this even when my parents were separated for a short period and I chose to be with my father. My silent pain and tears no one could see and I could not even express, but something worse, a child may not experience or are exposed. If I was with my father or my mother had no effect, like that seen. When they in harmony with all my longings were reunited was my joy indescribable great and I got back my life again. torture and the pain disappeared. It could be otherwise, or otherwise not gone without much of me was killed.
   Later, not yet of legal age, I was even father and Sølvi on my own youth, the mother of our child (Bjørg). There was far above and beyond my young mind it is inconceivable that the adult world of clearer and clearer squeezed out me as a father, because they believed me and Sølvi was too young and that Sølvi his parents and his family, therefore, should be and become the child's only family. We were neither asked or heard with regard to anything. My heart could not understand any of this, nor my understanding. I was alienated at that age, so that the approximate everyone else, but it took several years before I came across it and realized something approximate what had happened and that the loss was irreparable, both for me and for the child. My own parents are not something to brag about for most people, like most other parents in relation to most other's opinion - but my parents, my father and mother. My confidence and my world. In mostly small sense of both security, confidence and satisfaction - but my right and obvious world. Even from before birth. Should anyone be talking about or threatening to remove one or both of these may have been some crazy monsters, without humanity or sense. Deranged perverts.
   My grandparents and my family and my surroundings around too, and for my and our world. The gap between the generations has never been able to indoctrinate me to accept. It is something completely different and wrong with regard to respect for marriage and family. Not a holy mystery and metamorphosis as marriage and child birth, but an injustice. I knew early and better and better, compared to most, with all my heart and all my understanding, that my children I will ensure that at every show is going to be better than anyone else's children, in all its moments and everyday life, childhood, youth and development, satisfaction, confidence, trust, joy and strength. And in an abundance of respect for next-love, human dignity and all the world's wisdom, exuberance and learning.
   Along the way, I was later father - and Trude's mother - and we did and lived with ten children. Up close and dear and to everyone's pleasure and satisfaction for many years. And all our children and our whole family was very legitimate and bragged and praised by all and everyone. Never anything else. Always happy, talent-filled, healthy, safe, reliable, robust, knowledgeable, energetic, polite, decent, kind and in every way successful children, each of them and they all. And always a pleasure and very good and praised experience for other people and families. Wherever we came. Up to 13 March 2006 (external) as Irene K. Hebnes and her co-players forced their way into our family with a crash of a cultural collision. There and then we were on the coarsest threatened and across harassed, in a ca. 95 minutes long meeting in Vikedal. And afterward by him and those with the deadly threats also Trude, in stages of fear and terror, and gradually. Then also through temptation and alluring. Schism in and for the family as a grotesque wedge began to appear. And neither Balder or Trudy was able to have perspective or peace of mind in relation to it. The fear, threats and harassment drove Trude into despair. And Balder into the mind of confusion, selfishness and pride. No less then terrorism, harassment and threats of further attacks worse and worse. And characterized by torture became stronger and stronger.
   When Trude 03 April 2008 kidnapped all of our children and held prisoner gagged and they had the course in stages gotten worse and worse in terms of threats, torture and despair. And this was a new and unimaginable climax for us all. But in the very different and various ways for the family as a prisoner held and gagged children. In order to "save the children from Irene K. Hebnes and the child care." After 03 April 2008 was more extreme and continuous terror, harassment and torture across from me and the children.

   It started early the year 2006 by Irene K. Hebnes their attack with harassment and threats, and continue with her false documentation and terrorist. She threatened and planned to take the children away from me, their father, and she has now with his fellow players definitely made, so she threatened, and so she laid a plan with false documentation. Her plan and the bulk of her false documentation stated her case presentations for the County District Commitee in Rogaland dated 13.12. 2007 (external). It contains just assumptions, distortions and harassment and a bunch of lies, she repeats over and over again in more or less variation in shape. And her battle plan and purpose. How-to do nothing Rune L. Hansen, father of the children. She knew even then approximate whom she had as their players and with whom she continues to expect that his fellow players. And that is how.
   And it was mainly quite as she planned and expected. Both the police, the county committee and the court, and several took on criminals show her the document, will and purpose so that truth and right and proper. They whitewashed it, påplusset harassment and injustice, to carry out its purpose. Via to maintain and continue the kidnapping, capture content and Gagging of the children, plus various criminal accessories. Neither I nor the children in question was taken seriously or estimated. Nor does the majority of witnesses, arguments and evidence.
   Anything and everything a grotesque heretic process continuously packed with terror, harassment, blackening, violations, threats, torture, outplundering, discrimination and oppression. Under the auspices of representatives of the Norwegian government and administration. An intense continuous ongoing spissrot-time for victim is the approximate or even impossible to relate to without adequate health, life values, home and everything destroyed and perish.
   A process in which the victim while harassed economic, across isolated, stigmatized, exhausted and disproved. And frateas right to exist. Any and all intended to-do nothing else.
   Concomitant with the judicial process on the basis of the criminal evidence dated 13.12. 2007 from Irene K. Hebnes, with wild allegations, lies, distortion and harassment, which automatically and uncritically continued and påplusses same suit in paragraph after paragraph, without substance or basis in truth or facts, without contradiction and without any real evidence or argument! With both claims without real substance and without adequate relevance. With largely bypass the full contents and concealment of evidence, arguments and witnesses. Only with discrimination, harassment, manipulation and terror. Not gross negligence or ignorance, but harassment and terror. A legal process packed with page also ongoing criminal insanity and staging. Where both I and the children abused in the grossest.
   Because I also know that such things do not exist and that claims that such things are mildly strong possible disprove. And I expect and demand that this should be done in full transparency and public disclosure. Some legitimate reasons are simply not.
   All this I have both audio recording and thorough documentation that proves iøvrig. And several thousand pages, I have during this horror nightmare had to write down and write to document, and also relate to time limits, priorities, kidnappings, catch hold, threats, etc. Iøvrig, just to keep track of legal documentation such as floods over one and keeping it updated has been and is in itself a great extent impossible to work for a single person.

Some kind of life and health is it anyway and after all left in me now as I type this, the end of December 2010. However, isolated, made a prisoner and slave, denigrated, harassed, insult, stigmatized, deprived the future, deprived of everything and close any, bruised and outplundered to the bones and deprived the life's right.

Children can now either still not understand that Norway has completely lost and we are according to Norwegian authorities and their own mother never ever more will be in contact with each other and that their father is deprived of the right to exist. The longer that goes, and this reality dawns on them, the more stunned and horrified, they will come to be. While the criminal gloating sneer and refer to their false documentation and its extremely unfair that right, and blame others. And it is also what all courts and judges have so far made in this entire matter complex. And the Norwegian Penal Code 1 month limit they left that does not exist at all, to say the least. The loss of my integrity and the children they had only scorn to spare. Likewise, our intense and ongoing struggle for justice and right to exist. Etc.. Scorn, harassment and blackening the whole way. Opposite the innocent from criminals. Roughly criminals faced with-human, human dignity and humanity.

   All of the terrorist regime and its co-players have been doing it all and each of criminal wrongdoing for not taking into account the children, not to show the children and their integrity and identity, respect, and to silence and to indoctrinate the children.
   And similarly in terms of father and mother.

   The child used as a pretext to threaten, destroy and plundered the father and / or mother. And contrary to threaten, destroy and plundered the child.
   The definitions of the child's best that is in effect a child's worst. Both the child, the parents, family and society's worst. And contrary to law.

   It is not just an Irene K. Hebnes. They are many and it is contagious and it spreads even game, behind the scenes!
   And certainly not from her. There is now an enormous wealth of the criminal madness of Norway, well into the perverse.
   And children, parents and people more and more reduced to objects, worthless, to be disposable.
   In and for a terrorist regime, behind the scenes, propaganda and false documentation, with the criminal manipulation of people and sub-minor laws. "

   Here I'll probably render a quick, rough, narrow chronological overview of the time for me and my family from 1989 forward to recent times:

   We settled ourselves and moved to Skaun in 1989, on a small farm (77 decare) we bought.
   Are there vulnerable to harassment from 1991-1992. I transform legal documentation.
   I staple in March 1994 HUN / Home Under viewer Norway, on the Internet / www since 24.12. 1996.
   Are forced to flee to exile 22.05. 1995, while still on paper actually live at home in Skaun (Sør-Trøndelag).
   Involuntary exile. More migration as refugees during the summer - and beyond. We are forced to quickly sell our home in Skaun.
   Register transfers to the National Register, 20.08. 1995 from Skaun to Åmli municipality (in Aust-Agder county).
   Register transfers to the National Register, 29.10. 1995 from Åmli of Rindal municipality (in More and Romsdal), rent residence.
   Subjected to harassment in municipal Rindal municipality.
   Register transfers to the National Register, from Rindal to arrive Sveio (Hordaland county) 26.02. 1996.
   Not exposed to local terrorist or harassment in Sveio. I work all the way on continued legal documentation.
   Register transfers to the National Register, from Sveio to Høylandet municipality (Nord-Trøndelag county) 15.07. 1998, where we buy a small farm (9 decare) as a temporary residence.
   Not exposed to local terrorist or harassment in Høylandet muncipality.
   Register transfers to the National Register, from Høylandet to (Ølen /) Vindafjord 08 2002. Sell our small farm in Høylandet.
   The involuntary exile (as of 22.05. 1995) terminates in a sense 08 2002. We reassured ourselves in relation to the municipal administration before the acquisition and relocation, for permanent residence.
   Exposed to local harassment and terror, from March 2006.

   From 26.02. 1996 until March 2006, we are relatively safe, and our home school had a proper supervisory system of public authorities. During this time, continued work on the case documentation, along with rehabilitation. Rehabilitation on my part especially in the time after we moved to Høylandet in 1998 and even more and better after that in 2002 we moved to Vindafjord, until March 2006.
   The worst time was thus from 1991 to 26.02. 1996. And from March 2006 until now.

   Trude move 03.04. 2008 from Vindafjord to Grue Municipality (South Hedmark county). She kidnaps, prisoner holding and gag while the kids.
   Everything what iøvrig and afterward have been stated in various documents.

   Furthermore, regarding the law:

   I anchor Haugaland District Court ruling handed down 08.12. 2010 by District Court Judge Per Annstein Aarvik, while I also argue that Judge Per Annstein Aarvik in and with his handling of the case have violated Penal Code § 110 Which iøvrig most of the judges involved in this case the complex has done. This I also crave at all to the Norwegian authorities prosecuted - with demands for restitution and compensation.
   Norwegian Penal Code Section 110 is as follows:
"A judge, juror, or assessor who in such capacity acts against his better judgment shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. / If he thereby caused any person to be wrongfully subjected to a penalty or to a greater
penalty than he deserved, or aided or abetted thereto, he shall be liable to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years. / If the felony has resulted in the execution of a death sentence or the serving of a custodial sentence for more than five years, imprisonment for a term not exceeding 21 years may be imposed."

   The judge that do injustice is just a criminal, too. Not worse than that.
   The Act also deals with it. The duties and criminal liabilites for a judge.

   It is extremely strong elements of sadism and perversiteter and an abundance of criminal insanity, harassment and discrimination from high maintenance and down permeates the Norwegian government called "child protection" its operations.
   That it is made aware of this is not popular among the criminal and may represent a lot of danger and risk. This has fully hit me and my children and my family.
   Under the auspices of representatives of the public abused children, parents, families and law of the roughest, in an abundance of false imprisonment.
   Tried hidden behind the scenes, propaganda and false documentation. And tried hidden behind false "alone-mothers" catch-up, Gagging, threats and rewards.
   A barnerov industry so macabre and grotesque that it surpasses most of the criminal madness.
   All of this is the case complex and this case is a typical example.

   Same also with regard to the district court judge Per Annstein Aarvik and other concerned officials judges involved in this whole case is also complex in its handling of the case, have violated and violated in particular the following fact, the current Norwegian law provisions:

Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Art 1 ((Menneskerettsloven Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 1)):
"Obligation to respect human rights / The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Art 3 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 3)):
"Prohibition of torture / No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

Torture-clause of the Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code 11. chapter, § 110-126, on "Crime in the public service" -
The Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code § 117a:
"Those who commit torture shall be punished by imprisonment of up to 15 years. In case of rough and severely tortured to death, imprisonment up to 21 years imposed. Those taking part is punishable in the same way. / With torture meant that a public official cause another person harm or serious physical or mental pain, / a) with the intention to obtain information or a confession, / b) with the intention to punish, threaten, or coerce anyone, or / c) because of the person's creed, race, color, gender, homosexual orientation, lifestyle or orientation or national or ethnic origin.
In this provision public official means anyone who / a) exercise public authority on behalf of the state or municipality, or / b) performs services or work as a state or municipality pursuant to law or regulation shall appoint someone to perform or fully or partially pay for.
It is also regarded as torture that the actions referred to in subsection are committed by a person acting at the request or with the express or implied consent from a public official. / Added by Act of June 25, 2004 No. 52 "

And General Sivil Penal Code § 123:
"Misuse of an official servant's position on the enterprise or failure of the service action to violate anyone's right, he shall be punished by fines or loss of service, or with imprisonment of up to 1 year. / Has he acted in the purpose to acquire for himself or another a improper gain, or if with the crime considerable injury or violation of rights has been wilful caused, imprisonment up to 5 years may be imposed. "

   And General Sivil Penal Code § 124:
"A Public Servants, which circuit unconstitutional use of its public position with the purpose or the story that persuaded some that do, speak, or refrain from something, punishable by fines or loss of service."

And General Sivil Penal Code § 125:
"A public servant who misleads or incites any official subordinate to him or under his supervision in the public service to commit a felony in this service, or who assists him therein or knowingly lets him commit such felony, or who abuses his office to incite another public servant to commit a felony in the public service or to assist him therein shall be liable to the same penalty as the latter. / Such penalty shall apply regardless of whether the other public servant is not criminally liable because of good faith or for any other reason."

False documentation-clause in the Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code 11. chapter, § 110-126, on "Crime in the public service" -
The Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code § 120:
"If a public servant in any record pertaining to his office have made a false entry or conceals the truth, or if he in preparing of any official document, telegram or telephone message or in stamping, marking or any other official attestation, which is issued to serve as evidence, makes or attests any false statement or conceals the truth, he shall be liable to loss of office or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, but not exceeding six years if he has acted for the purpose of obtaining for himself or another an improper gain or to injury anyone."

And false statement-clause in the Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code 18. chapter, § 179-214, on "Document false" -
The Norwegian General Sivil Penal Code § 189 and 190:
"§ 189. Any person who in any Norwegian or foreign official document or book or in any medical certificate makes an incorrect statement concerning any event or circumstance, for which the statement is intended to serve as evidence, or who contribute to, such a statement to be made, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to fines or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, but not exceeding three years if the intent was to obtain for himself or another an improper gain or to injury any person.
§ 190. Any person who uses as correct any such statement as is mentioned in section 189 shall be penalized as therein provided."

And General Sivil Penal Code § 215:
"§ 215. Any person who with improper intent attempts to deprive another person of the family status to which he is entitled or to acquire for himself or another person a false family status, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six years. If there are especially extenuating circumstances, fines may be imposed. / This provision shall not apply in determining paternity pursuant to the Children Act."

And General Sivil Penal Code § 216:
"§ 216. Any person who causes a minor to be unlawfully deprived of or kept deprived of his parents' or other concerneds' care, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. If there are extenuating circumstances, fines may be imposed. A public prosecution will only be instituted when requested by an aggrieved person."

General Sivil Penal Code § 223 (in the acts chapter about "Crimes against personal liberty"), according to the law:
"§ 223. Any person who unlawfully deprives another person of his liberty or who aids and abets such deprivation of liberty, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. / If the deprivation of liberty has lasted for more than one month, or has caused any person abnormal suffering or considerable injury to body or health or has resulted in the death of anyone, imprisonment for a term of not less than one year shall be imposed. / Anyone who conspires with anyone about to commit an act referred to in the second section shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years."

That 1 month according to the law in § 223, are a crass serious borderline for danger. Which i also assume is the apprehension of the main emphasis of the international society. Also what regards frames of sentencing.

And General Sivil Penal Code § 222, first section:
"§ 222. Any person who by unlawful conduct or by any threat thereof compels another person to do, submit to, or omit to do anything, or who aids and abets thereto, shall be liable to fines or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. If there are especially aggravating circumstances, cf. section 232, third sentence, imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 years may be imposed."

And all this have relevance also to General Sivil Penal Code § 132a-a:
"§ 132a: 132 a. Any person who by means of violence, threats, damage or other unlawful conduct aimed at a participator in the administration of justice or any of his next-of-kin / a) abehaves in such a way as is likely to influence the participator to perform or omit
to perform an act, task or service in connection with a criminal or civil case, or / b) retaliates for any act, task or service which the participator has performed in connection with a criminal or civil case shall be liable to a penalty for obstruction of the administration of justice. // A participator in the administration of justice means any person who / a) has reported a criminal matter or has brought an action in a civil case, / b) has made a statement to the police or to the court, / c) works or performs a service for the police, the prosecuting authority, the court or / the correctional services, / d) is a defence counsel, counsel for the aggrieved person or legal representative, or / e) is considering the performance of such an act or the undertaking of such a task or such a service. // Any person who aids and abets such an offence shall be liable to the same penalty. / Obstruction of the administration of justice shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years. If the act is committed under especially aggravating circumstances, a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years may be imposed. In deciding whether especially aggravating circumstances subsist, particular importance shall be attached to whether the offence has endangered any person’s life or health, has been committed on more than one occasion, or by two or more persons jointly, or is of a systematic or organized nature. / Grossly negligent obstruction of the administration of justice shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years."

And Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Art 8 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 8)):
"Right to respect for private and family life / 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. / 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

And Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Art 13 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 13)):
"Right to an effective remedy / Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity."

And Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Art 14 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 14)):
"Prohibition of discrimination / The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Protocol 7, Art 5 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Protokoll 7, Art 5)):
"Equality between spouses: / Spouses shall enjoy equality of rights and responsibilities of a private law character between them, and in their relations with their children, as to marriage, during marriage and in the event of its dissolution. This Article shall not prevent States from taking such measures as are necessary in the interests of the children."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 6, ECHR, Art 23 Paragraph 4 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 23 Punkt 4)):
"States Parties to the present Covenant shall take appropriate steps to ensure equality of rights and responsibilities of spouses as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. In the case of dissolution, provision shall be made for the necessary protection of any children."

And Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Art 6 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 6)):
"Right to a fair trial / 1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice. / 2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. / 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: / a. to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him; / b. to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence; / c. to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not a sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; / d. to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him; / e. to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court."

And Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Article 5 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Art 5)) (emphasizing made by me):
"Right to liberty and security", Point 1:
"1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:
a. the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court;
b. the lawful arrest or detention of a person for non-compliance with the lawful order of a court or in order to secure the fulfilment of any obligation prescribed by law;
c. the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so;
d. the detention of a minor by lawful order for the purpose of educational supervision or his lawful detention for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority;
e. the lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound mind, alcoholics or drug addicts or vagrants;
f. the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition."

And Human Rights Act, Appendix 2, ECHR, Protocol 4, Art 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 2, EMK, Protokoll 4 Art 2)):
"Freedom of movement / 1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence. / 2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own. / 3. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are in accordance with law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the maintenance of ordre public, for the prevention of crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. / 4. The rights set forth in paragraph 1 may also be subject, in particular areas, to restrictions imposed in accordance with law and justified by the public interest in a democratic society."

   Norwegian Constitution § 102, as simply and unequivocally says:
"House-inquisitions must not be done, except in criminal events." Period.

Also with regard to the law and right I will refer to the following conditions:
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the rest of The Human Rights Act ( external ) are actually very well anchored in Norway. Both The Norwegian Constitution § 110c and the Human Rights Act, § 3, are and shall be a solid confirmation of this.
   Constitution with its § 110c has defined by law following: "It is the responsibility of the authorities of the State to respect and ensure the human rights."
And § 3 of the Human Rights Act has law defined that the statutory of Human Rights Act "should prevail when conflicting provisions in other legislation".

A few words about "free legal representation" and economy:

   The court's criminal handling of this case the complex has resulted in both intentional and also economic harassment and discrimination faced father.
   As kidnappings, prison conditions and Gagging of the children. Both harassment, discrimination and plunder.
   And yet even to perform the judge saying that the government "has devoted substantial resources to have the matter properly discussed". When the truth is that the father has done it, while the public he is referring to hard doing all the opposite.
   It at all to want to charge the father financially in this case the complex legal process is and will be harassment and injustice. Therefore, and also the father to refuse 'free legal representation. "
   I refer to and requests that the application for attorneys' Tone Linn Thing Violence filed on behalf of me not to be denied met.
   Plaintiff (I, father) meet the criteria for legal aid. Self-declaration form was submitted Haugaland District Court by writ.

   Other juridical aspects of the case

   There are special reasons for Children Act § 64 which allows the ruling of the District Court Haugaland must be changed, also immediately.

   Over here in this write-appeal stated this.
   And there are special and important reasons, according to the Human Rights Act Attachment 8 Rights of the Child.
   Human Rights Act, Children Convention is particularly weighty words and phrases that deal, conserves and protects the child's best interests, in terms of law provisions protecting the child, family and parental rights. It's not like guessing or rude, false claims about children's best interests disregarded or invalidating the CRC provisions. Neither the abduction, capture range, harassment and Gagging of the children. It is contrary Human Rights Act and its Children's Convention's legal provisions and the Penal Code that recognizes and protects the children's best interests.

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 8 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 8 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1: States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.
   2: Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to speedily re-establishing his or her identity."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 39 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 39)):
"States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child."

And further in the Convention on the Rights of the Child:

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 2 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 2 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1. States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.
   2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 3 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 3 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1. In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.
2. States Parties undertake to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents, legal guardians, or other individuals legally responsible for him or her, and, to this end, shall take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 5 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 5)):
"States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 7 Paragraph 1 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 7 Punkt 1)):
"The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 8 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 8 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.
2. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to speedily re-establishing his or her identity."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 9 Paragraph 1 and 3 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 9 Punkt 1 og 3)):
"1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence.
3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child's best interests."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 13 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 13 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice.
2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; or
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 14 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 14 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 16 Paragraph 1 and 2 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 16 Punkt 1 og 2)):
"1. No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation.
2. The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 18 Paragraph 1 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 18 Punkt 1)):
"States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child. Parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 19 Paragraph 1 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 19 Punkt 1)):
"States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 29 Paragraph 1 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 29 Punkt 1)):
"States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to:
(a) The development of the child's personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;
(b) The development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations;
(c) The development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he or she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own;
(d) The preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, and friendship among all peoples, ethnic, national and religious groups and persons of indigenous origin;
(e) The development of respect for the natural environment."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 35 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 35)):
"States Parties shall take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent the abduction of, the sale of or traffic in children for any purpose or in any form."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 36 ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 36)):
"States Parties shall protect the child against all other forms of exploitation prejudicial to any aspects of the child's welfare."

Human Rights Act, Appendix 8, CRC, Art 37 Paragraph a and b ((Menneskerettslovens Vedlegg 8, CRC, Art 37 Punkt a og b)):
"States Parties shall ensure that:
(a) No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age;
(b) No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time".

Showing further the way that the Supreme Court determines in plenary ruling Rt 2000 p. 996: It follows from the primacy provision in the Human Rights Act, § 3 that if "the interpretation of results arising from the ECHR appears to be reasonably clear, the Norwegian courts most add Convention provision as the basis "..." convention provision (must be) the basis though this would mean that Norwegian law or established practice would be set aside. " Management emphasizes that the application of the law by national courts must use "the method applied in the Court" or "use the same principles of interpretation"as European Human Rights Court.

   Here is further and as a matter of form to point on that the mother has not shown an active loyalty and participation to visiting arangements as she is obliged, cf. Rt-1969-374 U, later confirmed in among other Rt-1988-708 U and Rt-1997-797.

   And also pointed out that mother Trude with the captivity and gagging of the children can be said to have violated Penal Code § 219, both in relation to the children, their father and grandmother.
   Penal Code § 219: "Whoever by threat, force, restrict freedom of movement to, violence against, or otherwise violate, gross or repeated abuse / a) his former or present spouse / b) his or former or present spouse's relative in right descending line, / c) their relative in the ascending straight line, / d) someone in their household, or / e) someone in their care / / shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. / If the maltreatment is severe or the victim as a result of the action death or serious injury to body or health, the penalty is imprisonment for up to 6 years. In determining whether the maltreatment is serious, particular attention should be to whether it has lasted a long time and whether there are circumstances referred to in § 232. / Any person who aids and abets such an offence shall be liable to the same penalty."

It is consequently necessary also to have a temporary ruling in the case.

   See also The Children Act, § 60
   Decisions on habitual residence, custody and visitation should all be determined based on the children's best interests, even under the Children Act, § 48
   The provisions of the Children Act for a permanent residence provided by the Children Act § 36 and child visitation rights with both their parents follow the Children Act § 42.

   With reservations about further submissions and evidences this is to be declared as

STATEMENT OF CLAIM:

1. Frøydis Hansen b. 25.12.1993, Stauda Sofie Hansen b. 24.05.1997, Alfredo Ao Hansen b. 17.08.1999, Mariel Rose Hansen b. 21.12.2001, Urda Lilje Hansen b. 14.06.2003, Solborg Sera Hansen b. 28.02.2006 and Tormod Hansen b. 15.04.2008 shall have their firm and first home with Rune Leander Hansen.

2. Primary: Father shall have part in the juridical parental responsibility for Frøydis Hansen, Stauda Sofie Hansen, Alfredo Ao Hansen, Mariel Rose Hansen, Urda Lilje Hansen, Solborg Sera Hansen and Tormod Hansen.

2. Secondarily: Father shall have the juridical parental responsibility for Frøydis Hansen, Stauda Sofie Hansen, Alfredo Ao Hansen, Mariel Rose Hansen, Urda Lilje Hansen, Solborg Sera Hansen og Tormod Hansen.

3. Father takes care of the children's right to contact and to be together with their mother.

               Temporary decision:

   1. Frøydis Hansen b. 25.12.1993, Stauda Sofie Hansen b. 24.05.1997, Alfredo Ao Hansen b. 17.08.1999, Mariel Rose Hansen b. 21.12.2001, Urda Lilje Hansen b. 14.06.2003, Solborg Sera Hansen b. 28.02.2006 and Tormod Hansen b. 15.04.2008 shall have their firm and first home with Rune Leander Hansen.

2. Primary: Father shall have part in the juridical parental responsibility for Frøydis Hansen, Stauda Sofie Hansen, Alfredo Ao Hansen, Mariel Rose Hansen, Urda Lilje Hansen, Solborg Sera Hansen and Tormod Hansen.

2. Secondarily: Father shall have the juridical parental responsibility for Frøydis Hansen, Stauda Sofie Hansen, Alfredo Ao Hansen, Mariel Rose Hansen, Urda Lilje Hansen, Solborg Sera Hansen og Tormod Hansen.

3. Father takes care of the children's right to contact and to be together with their mother.

                   In all cases:

4. Trude Monica Hansen replaces Rune Leander Hansen court costs plus statutory interest on arrears from the service of sentence and payment.

Rune L. Hansen,

Tindeland, 11. January 2011

Anke-print in the original signed copy for a avsendes Haugaland District Court Room. mail, and a copy in the form of a copy without signature rates. e-mail 11.01. 2011. Per copy. e-mail 11.01. 2011 also advocate Tone Linn Thingvold and to advocate Odd Arild Helland.

---