<p>In Norway, all government offices are required by law to keep a
list of every document or letter going in and out of the office.
Internal notes should also be listed. The document list (called mail
-journal - "Postjournal" in Norwegian) is public information and thanks
+journal - "postjournal" in Norwegian) is public information and thanks
to the Norwegian Freedom of Information Act (Offentleglova) the mail
journal is available for everyone. Most offices even publish the mail
journal on their web pages, as PDFs or tables in web pages. The state
level offices even have a shared web based search service (called
<ahref="https://www.oep.no/">Offentlig Elektronisk Postjournal -
-OEP</a>) to make it possible to search the entries in the list. In
-reality not all journal entries show up on OEP, and the search service
-is not very good, but OEP does make it easier to find interesting
-journal entries for those that are listed there.</p>
+OEP</a>) to make it possible to search the entries in the list. Not
+all journal entries show up on OEP, and the search service is hard to
+use, but OEP does make it easier to find at least some interesting
+journal entries .</p>
<p>In 2012 I came across a document in the mail journal for the
-Norwegian Ministry of Transport and Communications that triggered my
-interest. The title of the document was
+Norwegian Ministry of Transport and Communications on OEP that
+triggered my interest. The title of the document was
"<ahref="https://www.oep.no/search/resultSingle.html?journalPostId=4192362">Internet
Governance and how it affect national security</a>" (Norwegian:
"Internet Governance og påvirkning på nasjonal sikkerhet"). The
document date was 2012-05-22, and it was said to be sent from the
"Permanent Mission of Norway to the United Nations". I asked for a
copy, but my request was rejected with a reference to the law
-paragraph they believed allowed them to do this
+paragraph said to authorize them to reject it
(<ahref="http://lovdata.no/lov/2006-05-19-16/§20">offentleglova § 20,
letter c</a>) and an explanation that the document was except because
-of foreign policy interests because it contained information related
-to the Norwegian negotiating position, negotiating strategies or
-similar. I was told the information in the document related to the
-ongoing negotiation in the International Telecommunications Union
-(ITU). The explanation made sense in early January 2013, as a ITU
+of foreign policy interests as it contained information related to the
+Norwegian negotiating position, negotiating strategies or similar. I
+was told the information in the document related to the ongoing
+negotiation in the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). The
+explanation made sense to me in early January 2013, as a ITU
conference in Dubay discussing Internet Governance
(<ahref="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunication_Union#World_Conference_on_International_Telecommunications_2012_.28WCIT-12.29">World
Conference on International Telecommunications - WCIT-12</a>) had just
reasonable to believe talks were still going on a few weeks later.
Norway was represented at the ITU meeting by two authorities, the
Norwegian Communications Authority and the Ministry of Transport and
-Communications, which I guess is the reason the letter was send to
-that ministry. I also asked who had sent the document to the
-ministry, and was told that it was the Deputy Permanent Representative
-with the Permanent Mission of Norway in Geneva.</p>
+Communications. This might be the reason the letter was send to the
+ministry. As I was unable to find the document in the mail journal of
+any Norwegian UN mission, I asked the ministry who had sent the
+document to the ministry, and was told that it was the Deputy
+Permanent Representative with the Permanent Mission of Norway in
+Geneva.</p>
-<p>Three years later, I was still curious what the document contained,
-and again asked for a copy. This time
+<p>Three years later, I was still curious about the content of that
+document, and again asked for a copy, believing the negotiation was
+over now. This time
<ahref="https://mimesbronn.no/request/kopi_av_dokumenter_i_sak_2012914">I
asked both the Ministry of Transport and Communications as the
receiver</a> and
letter b</a>), thus claiming that they were required to keep the
content of the document from the public because they contained
information given to Norway with the expressed or implied expectation
-that the information were not made public. I asked the permanent
+that the information should not be made public. I asked the permanent
mission for an explanation, and was told that the document contained
an account from a meeting held in Pentagon for a limited group of NATO
nations where the organiser of the meeting did not intend the content
<ahref="https://www.mimesbronn.no/request/mote_2012_i_pentagon_om_itu">asked
them for a copy</> but obviously missed as I was told that the
document was unknown to them and that the author did not work there
-when the document was written. I then asked the Permanent Mission of
+when the document was written. Next, I asked the Permanent Mission of
Norway in Geneva and the Foreign Ministry to reconsider and at least
tell me who sent the document to Deputy Permanent Representative with
the Permanent Mission of Norway in Geneva. The Foreign Ministry also
the Norwegian Embassy in Washington. I do not know if this is the
same person as the author of the document.</p>
-<p>But if I understand things correctly, someone capable of inviting
-selected NATO nations to a meeting in Pentagon organised a meeting
-where someone attrepresenting the Norwegian defence attaché attended,
-and the account from this meeting is interpreted by the Ministry of
-Transport and Communications to expose Norways negotiating position,
-negotiating strategies and similar regarding the ITU negotiations on
-Internet Governance.</p>
+<p>If I understand the situation correctly, someone capable of
+inviting selected NATO nations to a meeting in Pentagon organised a
+meeting where someone representing the Norwegian defence attaché in
+Washington attended, and the account from this meeting is interpreted
+by the Ministry of Transport and Communications to expose Norways
+negotiating position, negotiating strategies and similar regarding the
+ITU negotiations on Internet Governance.</p>
<p>I wonder which NATO countries besides Norway attended this meeting?
-And what the content of the meeting really was?</p>
+And what exactly was said and done at the meeting? Anyone know?</p>
projects / homepage.git / commitdiff