In this way, the city of Oslo can enforce the bandage orders.

The city of Oslo could easily have been imposed to enforce an order on the use of face masks on public transport. That’s what law professor Henriette Sinding Aasen says.

The Infection Control Act provides authorities with the opportunity to punish people who do not follow the infection control measures adopted. Including the use of masks in public transport where the one meter distance rule cannot be met.

The regulations of the city of Oslo are based on the Infection Control Act. But it does not contain any provision on punishment.

I could have.

That’s what University of Bergen law professor Henriette Sinding Aasen says. She is a researcher in the field of health, wellness and human rights. She knows the Infection Control Law well.

Oslo could have done this to enforce the order.

On Tuesday night, it was still unclear how the Oslo order on the use of face masks will be enforced. The order went into effect Tuesday at 12 noon.

First, the police denied spending resources on this. Later, the Oslo police issued a press release in which they wrote that they will enforce municipal infection control regulations “within the framework of our daily service”. But they will not carry out systematic checks.

The Municipality of Oslo, for its part, said they have no legal basis, that is, a legal basis, to enforce the order.

As regulations are formulated for the city of Oslo, it is correct that the municipality cannot enforce the order itself.

But according to Henriette Sinding Aasen, it can be changed so that the municipality has the opportunity to do so. That is, by inserting a provision that a breach of the order may result in an administrative fee.

– Can Oslo, in principle, easily change the regulations so that they also apply to administrative fees?

– I want to believe it. The real legal basis is in the Infection Control Act. Extending regulation with something less intrusive than what can be done according to the law is not very problematic. An administrative fee is less intrusive than a police fine, Aasen says.

Johansen: Premise for the city council that it is not the responsibility of the municipalities

Councilor Raymond Johansen repeats to Aftenposten that they have considered it so that they have no authority to give people a request for non-use of mouth bandages.

“It was at all times a premise for the city council that it should not be the municipality or Ruter who has the responsibility to enforce,” he wrote in a statement.

Routes may charge a fee to people sneaking around on public transportation. But not if they drop the bandages, according to Johansen.

“When someone sneaks onto the tram, they have used a service for which they have not paid, and it is a matter of private law between Ruter and the sniper. Therefore, Ruter may charge a fee,” he writes.

He received large fines for violating quarantine rules

In the spring, the police enforced several violations of the quarantine rules. These were authorized in the regulations of the crown.

This happened under pressure from the Attorney General. The Attorney General’s guidelines for addressing infection control offenses were released on March 16. They were sent to the country’s police districts after the government issued new regulations to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.

The same month, Aftenposten wrote that the Attorney General wanted a quick punitive response. With fines of 20,000 crowns for violating quarantine rules. To achieve the greatest possible effect, the Attorney General also wanted the fines to be made public.

On March 25, we wrote that 10 out of 12 police districts had reported people for not following quarantine rules.

A person employed in the health and care service in a municipality in Møre og Romsdal was fined 20,000 crowns. The person in question had been quarantined for 14 days after being in contact with a person with a proven infection.