Horizontal Accountability
#4Key Findings
In the category of horizontal accountability, Norway falls into the top group (rank 4).
The independent Office of the Auditor General reviews government resource use. The government is required to follow up on reports, with failure possibly leading to a no-confidence vote in parliament. The Data Protection Authority (DPA) monitors compliance with data protection laws, receiving complaints and engaging in inspections.
Courts are independent of the executive. Professional standards and the quality of internal organization are high. The supreme court can test the constitutional legality of government decisions, but has not done so for many years. Civil rights and political liberties are strongly protected.
Very little corruption is evident, in part due to a culture of transparency in the civil service. The parliament has sufficient resources and powers to monitor the executive and to help shape policy effectively.
The independent Office of the Auditor General reviews government resource use. The government is required to follow up on reports, with failure possibly leading to a no-confidence vote in parliament. The Data Protection Authority (DPA) monitors compliance with data protection laws, receiving complaints and engaging in inspections.
Courts are independent of the executive. Professional standards and the quality of internal organization are high. The supreme court can test the constitutional legality of government decisions, but has not done so for many years. Civil rights and political liberties are strongly protected.
Very little corruption is evident, in part due to a culture of transparency in the civil service. The parliament has sufficient resources and powers to monitor the executive and to help shape policy effectively.
Graph View
Graph View
Is there an independent audit office? To what extent is it capable of exercising effective oversight?
10
9
9
There exists an effective and independent audit office.
8
7
6
7
6
There exists an effective and independent audit office, but its role is somewhat limited.
5
4
3
4
3
There exists an independent audit office, but its role is considerably limited.
2
1
1
There is no independent and effective audit office.
Norway’s independent statutory authority, the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), is named in the constitution and is accountable to parliament. Its main task is to ensure that the central government’s resources and assets are used and managed according to sound financial principles and in compliance with parliamentary decisions. In recent years, evaluations of the attainment of reform goals and the effectiveness of new laws have become increasingly important. The operations of fully and partially state-owned companies are also scrutinized. The OAG has 450 employees and is governed by a board of five directors, all selected by parliament for four years. The auditor general, appointed by parliament for a four-year term, leads the OAG. Decisions of the OAG have consistently been consensual. The government is required to follow up on all OAG reports. Failure to do so may result in a vote of no confidence in parliament.
Since 1962, Norway has had a Parliamentary Ombud appointed by parliament. This office investigates complaints from citizens regarding injustices, abuses, or errors by central or local public administrations. Additionally, the Ombud ensures that human rights are respected and conducts independent investigations. Every year, the Ombud’s office submits a report to parliament documenting its activities. Generally, the Ombud is active and trusted.
However, the Ombud has recently expressed concerns about the risk of losing funding and popular legitimacy because too few of its recommendations are taken seriously and implemented. Since 1962, the Ombud institution has been extended to other policy areas. The Ombudsperson for Children was established in 1981, followed by the Ombudsperson for Nondiscrimination in 2006, and the Ombudsperson for Older People in 2021.
Since 2017, all ministries have been required to formally assess the impacts of their policies on civil protection and emergency preparedness. The purpose of these written instructions was “to reinforce society’s capacity to prevent crises and to deal with serious incidents by means of comprehensive and coordinated work with civil protection and emergency preparedness” (Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security, 2017). Although this instrument is not implemented or assessed by an independent body, it serves as an example of horizontal coordination. However, the OAG might, on its own initiative, assess whether ministries comply with the regulation.
Citations:
Riksrevisjonen. 2024. Annual Report 2023. Document 2 (2023-2024). https://www.riksrevisjonen.no/contentassets/9e1061c5f7fe4678b4b93e5d1e5bb611/annual-report-2023.pdf
Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security. 2017. “Instructions for the Ministries’ Work with Civil Protection and Emergency Preparedness.” https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/instructions-for-the-ministries-work-with-civil-protection-and-emergency-preparedness/id2569693/
Since 1962, Norway has had a Parliamentary Ombud appointed by parliament. This office investigates complaints from citizens regarding injustices, abuses, or errors by central or local public administrations. Additionally, the Ombud ensures that human rights are respected and conducts independent investigations. Every year, the Ombud’s office submits a report to parliament documenting its activities. Generally, the Ombud is active and trusted.
However, the Ombud has recently expressed concerns about the risk of losing funding and popular legitimacy because too few of its recommendations are taken seriously and implemented. Since 1962, the Ombud institution has been extended to other policy areas. The Ombudsperson for Children was established in 1981, followed by the Ombudsperson for Nondiscrimination in 2006, and the Ombudsperson for Older People in 2021.
Since 2017, all ministries have been required to formally assess the impacts of their policies on civil protection and emergency preparedness. The purpose of these written instructions was “to reinforce society’s capacity to prevent crises and to deal with serious incidents by means of comprehensive and coordinated work with civil protection and emergency preparedness” (Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security, 2017). Although this instrument is not implemented or assessed by an independent body, it serves as an example of horizontal coordination. However, the OAG might, on its own initiative, assess whether ministries comply with the regulation.
Citations:
Riksrevisjonen. 2024. Annual Report 2023. Document 2 (2023-2024). https://www.riksrevisjonen.no/contentassets/9e1061c5f7fe4678b4b93e5d1e5bb611/annual-report-2023.pdf
Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security. 2017. “Instructions for the Ministries’ Work with Civil Protection and Emergency Preparedness.” https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/instructions-for-the-ministries-work-with-civil-protection-and-emergency-preparedness/id2569693/
Is there an independent authority that effectively holds government offices accountable for their handling of data protection and privacy issues?
10
9
9
An independent and effective data protection authority exists.
8
7
6
7
6
An independent and effective data protection authority exists, but its role is somewhat limited.
5
4
3
4
3
A data protection authority exists, but both its independence and effectiveness are considerably limited.
2
1
1
There is no effective and independent data protection office.
The Norwegian Data Protection Authority (DPA) is responsible for holding the government accountable for data protection and privacy issues, and for safeguarding individuals’ privacy rights. Established in 1980, the DPA currently has 68 employees. Although the Director is appointed by the government, the DPA operates with legally granted autonomy. The primary legislation guiding the DPA’s work is the Personal Data Act (PDA), which establishes the general principle that individuals should be able to control how their personal data is used. The PDA implements the EU GDPR in Norwegian legislation.
Through information, dialogue, the handling of complaints, and inspections, the DPA monitors and ensures that public authorities, companies, NGOs, and individuals comply with data protection legislation. For example, the DPA effectively halted the use of a COVID-19 contact-tracing application due to inadequate personal data protection relative to infection numbers at the time. In 2023, the DPA imposed a substantial fine (NOK 20 million) on the Labor and Welfare Administration for failing to operate the legally required procedures for handling sensitive personal data. Media attention to data protection is generally high, especially when public bodies fail to comply with their legal obligations.
Nevertheless, the number of cases that the Norwegian DPA must manage has increased in recent years. These cases relate both to transparency issues, where companies, media, and individuals request access to documentation about the agency’s work, as well as data leaks and privacy incidents in public and private organizations. This has forced the agency to prioritize some matters over others, as it simply does not have the resources to follow up on all cases and conduct as many inspections as desired.
Citations:
Norwegian Data Protection Authority. https://www.datatilsynet.no/en/
Through information, dialogue, the handling of complaints, and inspections, the DPA monitors and ensures that public authorities, companies, NGOs, and individuals comply with data protection legislation. For example, the DPA effectively halted the use of a COVID-19 contact-tracing application due to inadequate personal data protection relative to infection numbers at the time. In 2023, the DPA imposed a substantial fine (NOK 20 million) on the Labor and Welfare Administration for failing to operate the legally required procedures for handling sensitive personal data. Media attention to data protection is generally high, especially when public bodies fail to comply with their legal obligations.
Nevertheless, the number of cases that the Norwegian DPA must manage has increased in recent years. These cases relate both to transparency issues, where companies, media, and individuals request access to documentation about the agency’s work, as well as data leaks and privacy incidents in public and private organizations. This has forced the agency to prioritize some matters over others, as it simply does not have the resources to follow up on all cases and conduct as many inspections as desired.
Citations:
Norwegian Data Protection Authority. https://www.datatilsynet.no/en/
Graph View
To what extent does an independent judiciary ensure that the government, administration and legislature operate in accordance with the constitution and law?
10
9
9
The judiciary effectively ensures that the government and legislature act in accordance with the law.
8
7
6
7
6
The judiciary usually manages to ensure that the government and legislature act in accordance with the law.
5
4
3
4
3
The judiciary fails to ensure effective legal compliance in some crucial cases.
2
1
1
The judiciary fails to ensure effective legal control.
Norway’s government and administration are predictable and operate in accordance with the law. The country has a sound and transparent legal system with minimal corruption within its judiciary. The state bureaucracy is considered both efficient and reliable, and Norwegian citizens generally trust their institutions.
Although the supreme court can, in principle, test the constitutional legality of government decisions, it has not done so for many years. The court system provides mechanisms for reviewing executive actions and follows principles of the Scandinavian civil law system (Norwegian Bar Association, 2023a). Unlike other civil law countries, Norway does not have a general codification of private or public law. Instead, comprehensive statutes codify central aspects such as criminal law and the administration of justice.
Norwegian courts do not place as much emphasis on judicial precedents as do courts in common law countries. Court procedures are relatively informal and simple, with significant lay influence in the judicial assessment of criminal cases.
At the top of the judicial hierarchy is the supreme court (Høyesterett), followed by the Court of Appeal (lagmannsrettene). The majority of criminal matters are settled summarily in the District Courts (tingrettene) (Norwegian Bar Association, 2023b). A Court of Impeachment is available to hear charges brought against government ministers, members of parliament, and supreme court judges, although it is very rarely used. The last time someone was charged and convicted was in 1884.
The courts are independent of any influence exerted by the executive. Professional standards and the quality of internal organization are high. The selection of judges is rarely disputed and is not seen as involving political issues. All judges are formally appointed by a government decision based on a recommendation issued by an autonomous body, the “Innstillingsrådet.” This body is composed of three judges, one lawyer, a legal expert from the public sector, and two members not from the legal profession. The government almost always follows the recommendations. Supreme Court justices are not considered political, and their tenure security is guaranteed in the constitution. There is a firm tradition of autonomy in the supreme court. The appointment of judges attracts limited attention and rarely leads to public debate.
There are very few instances of corruption in Norway. The cases that have surfaced in recent years have been at the municipal level and are related to public procurement. As a rule, corrupt officeholders are prosecuted under established laws. There is a great social stigma against corruption, even in its minor manifestations.
Access to the court system is relatively easy, but the risk of potentially high legal fees may prevent many from bringing their issues to court.
Citations:
Norwegian Bar Association. 2023. “Features of the Norwegian Legal System.” https://www.advokatforeningen.no/en/features-of-the-norwegian-legal-system/features-of-the-norwegian-legal-system
Norwegian Bar Association. 2023b. “Structure of the Courts.” https://www.advokatforeningen.no/en/features-of-the-norwegian-legal-system/structure-of-the-courts/
Although the supreme court can, in principle, test the constitutional legality of government decisions, it has not done so for many years. The court system provides mechanisms for reviewing executive actions and follows principles of the Scandinavian civil law system (Norwegian Bar Association, 2023a). Unlike other civil law countries, Norway does not have a general codification of private or public law. Instead, comprehensive statutes codify central aspects such as criminal law and the administration of justice.
Norwegian courts do not place as much emphasis on judicial precedents as do courts in common law countries. Court procedures are relatively informal and simple, with significant lay influence in the judicial assessment of criminal cases.
At the top of the judicial hierarchy is the supreme court (Høyesterett), followed by the Court of Appeal (lagmannsrettene). The majority of criminal matters are settled summarily in the District Courts (tingrettene) (Norwegian Bar Association, 2023b). A Court of Impeachment is available to hear charges brought against government ministers, members of parliament, and supreme court judges, although it is very rarely used. The last time someone was charged and convicted was in 1884.
The courts are independent of any influence exerted by the executive. Professional standards and the quality of internal organization are high. The selection of judges is rarely disputed and is not seen as involving political issues. All judges are formally appointed by a government decision based on a recommendation issued by an autonomous body, the “Innstillingsrådet.” This body is composed of three judges, one lawyer, a legal expert from the public sector, and two members not from the legal profession. The government almost always follows the recommendations. Supreme Court justices are not considered political, and their tenure security is guaranteed in the constitution. There is a firm tradition of autonomy in the supreme court. The appointment of judges attracts limited attention and rarely leads to public debate.
There are very few instances of corruption in Norway. The cases that have surfaced in recent years have been at the municipal level and are related to public procurement. As a rule, corrupt officeholders are prosecuted under established laws. There is a great social stigma against corruption, even in its minor manifestations.
Access to the court system is relatively easy, but the risk of potentially high legal fees may prevent many from bringing their issues to court.
Citations:
Norwegian Bar Association. 2023. “Features of the Norwegian Legal System.” https://www.advokatforeningen.no/en/features-of-the-norwegian-legal-system/features-of-the-norwegian-legal-system
Norwegian Bar Association. 2023b. “Structure of the Courts.” https://www.advokatforeningen.no/en/features-of-the-norwegian-legal-system/structure-of-the-courts/
How well does the executive branch and its members uphold and safeguard civil rights, and to what extent do the courts effectively protect citizens against rights violations?
10
9
9
There are no limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
8
7
6
7
6
There are no significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
5
4
3
4
3
There are some significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
2
1
1
There are multiple significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
State institutions respect and protect civil rights. Personal liberties are well protected against abuse by both state and non-state actors. People cannot be detained without a formal charge for more than 24 hours. A court decision is needed to hold a suspect in prison during an investigation, a matter given more serious consideration in Norway than in many other countries. Access to the courts is free and easy, and the judiciary system is generally regarded by the public as fair and efficient. However, losing a case in court can result in having to pay the full cost of the proceedings. This financial risk, along with the prohibitive fees lawyers may charge, can deter citizens from bringing cases to court. For those with extremely low incomes, there is a state program to cover legal costs. Additionally, most labor union memberships – which are widespread – include insurance against high expenses.
Political liberties are protected by the constitution and the law. The right to free expression was strengthened through a constitutional amendment in 2004. Limitations to freedom of speech, such as hate speech or discrimination, are regulated by law. All citizens may comment on legislative proposals in hearing procedures.
In 2014, the Sámi minority was granted explicit rights to their own language and cultural expressions. Norway has ratified all international conventions on human and civil rights. The European Convention on Human Rights is incorporated into national law. The right to free worship and other religious activities is ensured.
The historical tradition of a privileged, state-owned Lutheran church ended in 2017, and now all religious communities are treated equally. Political liberties are respected by state institutions. Equality of opportunity and equality before the law are firmly established in Norway.
There is a Parliamentary Ombud for civil rights (established in 1962) and one for Equality and Anti-Discrimination (established in 1972). There was also an Ombud for the Elderly (established in 2021, repealed as of July 2023).
The Sámi minority living in the north has a limited right to self-rule, though there are still some unsettled issues over the use of natural resources in this area. Men and women are nearly on par in terms of education levels. Women’s labor-force participation rate is comparatively high among OECD countries. Women earn on average 87.5% of what men do. However, once hours worked, occupation, education, and seniority are taken into consideration, it is difficult to verify significant differences between the earnings of men and women. This finding does not necessarily imply that there is no gender discrimination in the labor market; for example, men may be more readily hired for high-paying occupations.
In 2017, several instances of gender-based discrimination were disclosed as a result of the #MeToo campaign. However, affirmative action in favor of women has been used extensively in the labor market, particularly within the public sector. Despite this, the labor market remains strongly segregated by gender and occupation compared to the situation in many other countries. Some discrimination against non-Western immigrants seems to persist. In some areas of the economy, immigrants find it comparatively difficult to find work and are generally paid lower wages. Unemployment rates are also substantially higher among immigrant populations than among native Norwegians. Although discrimination against immigrants, including in the labor market, is illegal, it does take place in some areas of Norwegian society, though very few discrimination cases are prosecuted.
Citations:
About the Parliamentary Ombud. https://www.sivilombudet.no/en/about-the-parliamentary-ombudsman/
The Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud. https://www.ldo.no/en/ldo-english-page/
Political liberties are protected by the constitution and the law. The right to free expression was strengthened through a constitutional amendment in 2004. Limitations to freedom of speech, such as hate speech or discrimination, are regulated by law. All citizens may comment on legislative proposals in hearing procedures.
In 2014, the Sámi minority was granted explicit rights to their own language and cultural expressions. Norway has ratified all international conventions on human and civil rights. The European Convention on Human Rights is incorporated into national law. The right to free worship and other religious activities is ensured.
The historical tradition of a privileged, state-owned Lutheran church ended in 2017, and now all religious communities are treated equally. Political liberties are respected by state institutions. Equality of opportunity and equality before the law are firmly established in Norway.
There is a Parliamentary Ombud for civil rights (established in 1962) and one for Equality and Anti-Discrimination (established in 1972). There was also an Ombud for the Elderly (established in 2021, repealed as of July 2023).
The Sámi minority living in the north has a limited right to self-rule, though there are still some unsettled issues over the use of natural resources in this area. Men and women are nearly on par in terms of education levels. Women’s labor-force participation rate is comparatively high among OECD countries. Women earn on average 87.5% of what men do. However, once hours worked, occupation, education, and seniority are taken into consideration, it is difficult to verify significant differences between the earnings of men and women. This finding does not necessarily imply that there is no gender discrimination in the labor market; for example, men may be more readily hired for high-paying occupations.
In 2017, several instances of gender-based discrimination were disclosed as a result of the #MeToo campaign. However, affirmative action in favor of women has been used extensively in the labor market, particularly within the public sector. Despite this, the labor market remains strongly segregated by gender and occupation compared to the situation in many other countries. Some discrimination against non-Western immigrants seems to persist. In some areas of the economy, immigrants find it comparatively difficult to find work and are generally paid lower wages. Unemployment rates are also substantially higher among immigrant populations than among native Norwegians. Although discrimination against immigrants, including in the labor market, is illegal, it does take place in some areas of Norwegian society, though very few discrimination cases are prosecuted.
Citations:
About the Parliamentary Ombud. https://www.sivilombudet.no/en/about-the-parliamentary-ombudsman/
The Equality and Anti-Discrimination Ombud. https://www.ldo.no/en/ldo-english-page/
To what extent are public officeholders prevented from abusing their position for private interests?
10
9
9
Legal, political and public integrity mechanisms effectively prevent public officeholders from abusing their positions.
8
7
6
7
6
Most integrity mechanisms are effective and provide disincentives for public officeholders to abuse their positions.
5
4
3
4
3
Few integrity mechanisms are effective and provide disincentives for public officeholders to abuse their positions.
2
1
1
Public officeholders can exploit their offices for private gain as they see fit without fear of legal consequences or adverse publicity.
Norway emphasizes transparency in its civil service to minimize the risk of corruption. This involves providing access to public information and ensuring transparency in decision-making processes. The general public – and hence the media – has access, in principle, to all documents in any case through the Freedom of Information Act. Any party directly involved in a case also normally has extended rights to information. A principle of transparency also regulates public procurement processes.
Government agencies are required to implement internal control systems to prevent and detect corruption. Regular audits of financial transactions and processes are conducted to ensure compliance. Independent oversight bodies, such as Økokrim (the National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime) and the Office of the Auditor General, play a crucial role in monitoring and enforcing laws related to corruption. Whistleblower protection mechanisms are in place, allowing employees to report suspicious activities without fear of retaliation.
The financing of political parties is strictly regulated, and all donations from private individuals must be declared and open. The economic interests of all members of parliament and cabinet members are publicly accessible through a separate register. Political commitment to combating corruption is crucial. Norwegian authorities have consistently expressed their dedication to addressing corruption and have taken steps to strengthen legislation when necessary. Continuous efforts are made to reform and improve public sector practices to minimize corruption risks. This includes streamlining processes, enhancing efficiency, and reducing bureaucratic obstacles. The use of data analytics and technology is increasingly employed to identify irregularities and potential corruption within government operations.
Transparency International, an international civil society organization, has an active Norwegian branch that surveys the situation in Norway and provides training for public sector officials on how to implement anti-corruption measures.
Citations:
Stortinget. 2024. “Register of Members’ Appointments and Economic Interests.” https://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/Members-of-the-Storting/Registered-Interest/
National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime (Økokrim). https://www.okokrim.no/oekokrim-in-english.549343.no.html
Transparency International Norway. https://www.transparency.no/in-english
Government agencies are required to implement internal control systems to prevent and detect corruption. Regular audits of financial transactions and processes are conducted to ensure compliance. Independent oversight bodies, such as Økokrim (the National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime) and the Office of the Auditor General, play a crucial role in monitoring and enforcing laws related to corruption. Whistleblower protection mechanisms are in place, allowing employees to report suspicious activities without fear of retaliation.
The financing of political parties is strictly regulated, and all donations from private individuals must be declared and open. The economic interests of all members of parliament and cabinet members are publicly accessible through a separate register. Political commitment to combating corruption is crucial. Norwegian authorities have consistently expressed their dedication to addressing corruption and have taken steps to strengthen legislation when necessary. Continuous efforts are made to reform and improve public sector practices to minimize corruption risks. This includes streamlining processes, enhancing efficiency, and reducing bureaucratic obstacles. The use of data analytics and technology is increasingly employed to identify irregularities and potential corruption within government operations.
Transparency International, an international civil society organization, has an active Norwegian branch that surveys the situation in Norway and provides training for public sector officials on how to implement anti-corruption measures.
Citations:
Stortinget. 2024. “Register of Members’ Appointments and Economic Interests.” https://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/Members-of-the-Storting/Registered-Interest/
National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime (Økokrim). https://www.okokrim.no/oekokrim-in-english.549343.no.html
Transparency International Norway. https://www.transparency.no/in-english
Graph View
Do members of the legislature possess sufficient personnel and structural resources to effectively monitor government activities?
10
9
9
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for effectively monitoring all government activity.
8
7
6
7
6
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for effectively monitoring a government’s key activities.
5
4
3
4
3
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for selectively monitoring some government activities.
2
1
1
The resources provided to legislative members are not suited for any effective monitoring of the government.
In the Norwegian parliamentary system, the legislature – the Storting, at the national level – has a monopoly on determining taxes and deciding any public expenditure. Formally, the legislature may allocate the resources it regards as necessary for its own activities. However, according to the constitution, the executive is responsible for preparing the knowledge base for new policy proposals.
The Storting’s administration consists of seven departments and 29 sections, including a Knowledge and Documentation Department, and employs a staff of about 450 (the Storting, 2024). Compared to the apparatus in the ministries, the resources available to the legislature and the members of parliament are modest. If the legislature wants an issue investigated, the normal procedure is to require this from the government, rather than initiating it on its own. It is the obligation of ministers to come to the parliament to answer any questions the legislature might have. In recent years, a special parliamentary committee may require ministers and others involved in a case to come to a separate hearing to answer questions from the members of parliament. The control of the legislature over the executive is not so much a matter of material resources, but rests in the legal and procedural controls embedded in the parliamentary system.
Citations:
The Storting. 2024. “Administration.” https://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/Administration/
The Storting’s administration consists of seven departments and 29 sections, including a Knowledge and Documentation Department, and employs a staff of about 450 (the Storting, 2024). Compared to the apparatus in the ministries, the resources available to the legislature and the members of parliament are modest. If the legislature wants an issue investigated, the normal procedure is to require this from the government, rather than initiating it on its own. It is the obligation of ministers to come to the parliament to answer any questions the legislature might have. In recent years, a special parliamentary committee may require ministers and others involved in a case to come to a separate hearing to answer questions from the members of parliament. The control of the legislature over the executive is not so much a matter of material resources, but rests in the legal and procedural controls embedded in the parliamentary system.
Citations:
The Storting. 2024. “Administration.” https://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/Administration/
Are legislative committees able to exercise oversight of government activities in practice?
10
9
9
The legislature is able to exercise its oversight function.
8
7
6
7
6
The legislature is able to exercise its oversight function most of the time.
5
4
3
4
3
The legislature faces constraints in exercising its oversight function in a significant number of cases.
2
1
1
The legislature’s oversight function is frequently and severely compromised.
The 169 members of parliament are divided into 12 committees, roughly corresponding to the ministries. Norway is a small country, and the processes of policymaking are generally open and transparent. The conditions under which the government may withhold a document from a parliamentary committee are clearly specified and very rarely a matter of dispute. Ministers are required to come to parliament and answer any questions committee members may have. If dissatisfied with the response or with any other aspect of how the office of being a minister is executed, a vote of no confidence may be proposed.
Do legislative committees have the capacity to investigate unconstitutional or illegal activities carried out by the executive branch?
10
9
9
The legislature is able to exercise its investigation function.
8
7
6
7
6
The legislature is able to exercise its investigation function most of the time.
5
4
3
4
3
The legislature faces constraints in exercising its investigation function in a significant number of cases.
2
1
1
The legislature’s investigation function is frequently and severely compromised
According to the Norwegian constitution, the government must have the support of a majority of members of parliament. Any initiative from opposition parties to investigate government actions would require a parliamentary majority, as there is no institutionalized right for a minority to take action. If an allegation of misconduct is raised by the opposition but not followed up by the government, the case would likely attract the interest of the media and independent agencies. However, for the opposition to impact the government, it would need to secure a majority vote in parliament. Given the fragmentation of the Norwegian party system and the reliance on party coalitions, any proposal to investigate alleged unconstitutional activities will most likely secure a majority in parliament.
To what extent are the organization and operations of legislative committees effective in guiding the development of legislative proposals?
10
9
9
The organization and operations of legislative committees are well-suited for effectively monitoring ministry activity.
8
7
6
7
6
The organization and operations of legislative committees are, for the most part, suited for effectively monitoring ministry activity.
5
4
3
4
3
The organization and operations of legislative committees are rarely suitable for monitoring ministry activity.
2
1
1
The organization and operations of legislative committees are not at all suitable for monitoring ministry activity.
The members of parliament are divided into 12 committees, which roughly correspond to the ministries in the government. The workload is substantial but not so high as to prevent effective oversight of government activities. The chairs of the committees are distributed according to the relative size of the parties in parliament, with the parliamentary majority – either as a formal or de facto coalition – naming the committee chairpersons. Since there are 12 chairs to fill, a parliamentary majority of fewer than 12 implies that some committees must be chaired by members of the opposition. It is an informal norm that the vice chairperson belongs to the opposing party or coalition of the chairperson. The conventional order of proceedings in a committee is that a government proposal is debated, and changes are common.