Amazing Videos of Global Anti-Barnevenet Protests

Thousands are marching in protest against the Norwegian CPS (Barnevernet) for confiscating the five Bodnariu children without warning, without investigation, and without due process.

20 comments on “Amazing Videos of Global Anti-Barnevenet Protests

  1. Today there are the two demonstrations in India. For the one in Delhi, I heard from Suranya Aiyar last night that she was busy making posters. It is from 11 am to 3 pm. India is three and a half hours ahead of us, so the demo is taking place now. It will be near Parliament House and then at the Embassy of Norway. They have some very good speakers, including the secretary general of the “Christian Council of India”, who has also said that he will take the CPS question up with leaders of the Protestant and Catholic Church in India.

    I have not heard any particulars about Kolkata, but hope that too will be successful. Sagarika Chakraborti, the mother who was so cruelly attacked in Stavanger some years ago, but who at last succeeded of getting her children back in India, is active in Kolkata.

        More is coming, I think.

        Suranya wrote that she tried to post last night (Indian time) but didn’t get through, but at least her mail is here now. She writes that she had known there would be few people but those that were there listened really attentively, including the police who were there by arrangement, since it was an announced demonstration. The police women actually hissed and said “We would give our lives for our children” and “How can there be such a system abroad?”

        They had a little puppet show on the theme “mother’s love”. They had several good speeches too. They had focused on the fact that there are several cases in several Western countries, some of them of Indian parents, but also a special focus on the Bodnariu case and Eva Michaláková’s case.

        At the end they went to the Norwegian Embassy and handed over their signed protest posters to an Embassy official. They also went to the US Embassy. (Indian parents have had some cases in the US too, where children have been taken without evidence. In one case, the CPS in New Jersey had a long questionnaire which the grandparents were supposed to be investigated in relation to, because the family had raised the possibility of sending the child to the grandparents in India. Among the questions: whether their house had air conditioning and whether they were of a pleasing appearance.)

        Suranya also heard from Kolkata that the demo there had gone all right.


        My thoughts regarding the number of people turning up, is that 1) it is more difficult when it is not exactly at that moment a question of your own citizens, and nevertheless 2) there have been little demonstrations now and then in Norway for years with fewer than a dozen people taking part. Committed persons have still taken them on, some several times, among other things to speak to people coming by, trying to draw interest.

  2. Here is the story of Cecilie Bedsvaag, a Norwegian married with a Romanian. Their daughter was taken away by Barnevernet even though the Police investigation concluded there was no evidence of abuse:

  3. Pingback: Amazing Videos of Global Anti-Barnevenet Protests | ARMONIA MAGAZINE - USA

  4. Videos of speeches in New Delhi are coming in:

    Note: Brinda Karat is a prominent Marxist politician, and into the video somewhere she speaks about the menace of privatisation in child protection. I agree with her that the private companies selling their services to the CPS, like institutional places and assessments of families (!), are very bad indeed. But the municipalities own employees, the state’s, not to mention the state’s colleges that run the education of child protection workers, are equally bad.

    Brinda Karat has an excellent formulation: “This is not a child protection service, it’s a child exploitation service.”

  5. A dimension of “direct evidence” must be considered for public consumption in Norway and EU, even though it is a little too hard to see, but it must be presented to as many Norway and EU public citizens (and the news media) for a consolidated impact, to wit:

    (1) direct evidence of ruinous “official conduct” and “official oppression” by the Barnevernet employees operating in tandem with Norway State police to confiscate healthy and (non-abused) children from healthy and decent family sanctuaries. Amass both paper evidence and video evidence (especially where Norway State police can be seen “aiding and abetting” (a crime) in the act of unlawful confiscation of children.
    (2) procure as many videos as possible that clearly shows the degree of involvement of State police and (with tacit acquiescence of) State Government operating “in tandem” with employees and agents of Barnevernet. These video should be multiplied in the thousands and distributed to the news media in EU, in Norway, and in front of Norway embassies.

    • Yes, I agree with you, and many people (both victims and professionals like lawyers, psychologists and others, some social workers too!) have tried to contribute to this, especially since the 1980s, writing articles, trying to have them published at home and abroad, and, since the internet, putting articles and videos on the web. I know some of the people, especially in Sweden and Denmark, countries that have basically the same kind of CPS. Many professionals also act for the families in court cases and publish, as far as they can (confidentiality clauses and attacks/threats from the authorities hinder some publishing), both items from court cases and from other parts of cases, and there are victims who publish court judgments and other accounts of their cases in spite of general harassment.

      But it is a larger task than you might think, and many of the victim families themselves are so beaten down both emotionally/mentally and economically that they are almost incapable of the sustained or vigorous effort and cooperation (the CPS tend to attack people who are vulnerable already). Some CPS victims let the professionals trying to help them, down at some stage of the case.

      A hinderance is also that in some cases the victims lie. Usually, the CPS lie far more extensively and harmfully, but in the public eye this is not so, the ordinary citizen is out to find some shameful secret or simply imperfection which can “explain” why the CPS have acted as they have. When publishing case histories, it takes much time and great resources to check on the reliability of each purported fact. Especially when there have already been involved court cases taking huge public resources, you can imagine what it is like for private individuals to try and go after the details of it all. Only the great number of cases with converging evidence compensates for this to some extent, showing that such-and-such action on the part of the CPS is indeed frequent.

      Still, there is a great body of evidence of the types you suggest, although it is a major difficulty that most of the things the CPS and the courts do, are perfectly legal. And if it is legal, the public will think that it is for the good. The law for Norway:
      (I am sorry it is not in English; there should be a translation somewhere e.g for the purpose of going to the European Court of Human Rights.) The law is of the “foggy and stretchable” type: Mostly, it is left up to the CPS and their child experts to assess what is necessary for a child’s “personal contact and safety, its needs, its health and future development”. The police are obliged to carry out orders and have over the years by various organisational means been made less entitled to make independent judgments about how to act in concrete situations.

      I agree it should be argued that much of such law is in reality inconsistent with superordinate principles of human rights and with the conventions covering that. But there we are, this is the real world. It would probably need a large organisation with many people working just on organising and systematising and checking and preparing a more systematic documentation and publishing, and it will all have to be done voluntarily by people who contribute resources as well as their own time. It is a long road getting there.

      • I should have added that, in addition to requiring a lot of time, a lot of people and probably a lot of money/resources, an efficient concerted attack on CPS legislation, education and practices requires the people who do the job to be in agreement about all the main lines and a lot of the detail in policy and action.

        In businesses, the people working together have the disciplining fact of having to make money out of their production etc; they cannot bicker endlessly and let work grind to a halt, and splitting up / leaving is problematic for their finances. In politics, if you have reached through to positions in parliament or local government, just arguing and pursuing your own line the whole time tends to mean you are more or less out again.

        In voluntary, idealistic work on the other hand, like they do in many NGOs (non-governmental organisations), patient associations, groups that want to reform this or that, groups of people wanting to obtain new runs of court cases that have been unjust, it is a common experience that the participants before long come to spend 90 % of their time fighting between themselves, especially if there is a bit of money to be spent. Many want to be big ducks in a small pond. – Such is the situation in groups fighting the CPS. They fall out, there are no repercussions for lying about the other members, they get ideas of how to use the “organisation” for a bit of personal gain, etc etc.

    • This idea of inbreeding is incorrect, Angeline. It comes from some speculation by a Lithuanian interpreter in a case re Lithuanian children vs Norwegian CPS, and it has already wandered around a lot.

      I have commented on it on DiT also, here:

      Going for inaccurate explanations of why the CPS act as they do may actually do harm to our attempts to have the system changed in favour of families. Such nonsense as this about inbreeding in Norway can so easily be refuted by the authorities, and in this case the authorities are correct. Therefore, they can ridicule opposition to CPS practices and write them off as uninformed and hysterical.

      So, please spread information, but try to check up on it being fairly correct to start with!


    The Norway’s totalitarian Rules and Regulations surrounding State-sponsored confiscation of Bodnarius’ family members (children) from their family sanctuary, purport to sanction the use of religious-driven phrases and ideologies, by parents, as “abuse of children”. And on this charge alone, the Barnevernet may confiscate the children from that family–as in the case of the Bodnarius. Expressing religiously-nuanced phrases and any such sentences orally to children, in Norway, it surely attracts the wrath of the State-sponsored confiscation of children from affected families by the totalitarian Barnevernet. Even trivial “manifestations” [singing a little religious song] by parents or children are perceived as “abuse”, and on those charges alone, the reprehensible and odious Barnevernet may confiscate the children from that family–as in the case of the Bodnarius family. Other trivial “manifestations” can be gleaned from the videos on youtube or complaints written on Internet by the emotionally traumatized parents.

    Norway State-sponsored invasion of parental sanctuary and infringing on God-ordained authority conferred upon parents is only one drastic part of the manifest violation of international human rights. Every Constitution of our modern democracies declare parental authority and family sanctuary as an inviolable principle of jurisprudence upon which society depends. In United States of America, under the Fourth Amendment’s Bill of Rights, even an “expectation of privacy” deserves protection by the federal Courts, in addition to the “right to be secure in the houses, papers and effects”– the society’s family’s sanctuary, and keystone of the governmental structure which was contemplated by the Constitution and Common Law.

    Norway State-sponsored intentional infliction of emotional distress is the other drastic aspect of violation of the international human rights. The invasion of family sanctuary and confiscation of its minor members (children) by the State-sponsored child services agency is cognizant in all democracies as a “severe emotional distress”–that is extreme and outrageous conduct that causes suffering such that no reasonable person should have to endure it. A mother (or father, or both) who experiences and witnesses the forceful separation from her children by State-sponsored actors, which by their abusive and negligent conduct, inflict severe emotional distress is legally entitled to recover (compensated) for her “emotional trauma” and any bodily accompanying injury!

    Finally, there are 13 important human rights which Norway has violated–and must compensate Bodnariu family, and the many victims, for the harm inflicted on them. Following are these human rights violated by Norway:
    (1) European Convention on Human Rights, released on 04/11/1950, Art. 6 (para. 2), Art. 8, Art.9, Art.13 &14.
    (2) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Art. 18, 23 and 24.
    (3) UN Convention on the Rights of the Child Art.8 para. 1 and 2, and Art.14(4)
    (4) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Art.18.
    (5) International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Art. 5, Para. 7.

    These 13 violations are enough to indict and convict Norway in any federal or International Court of Law.

    In light of the foregoing, even if the State returns the minor members (children) to their original family sanctuary, the parents of these minor persons (children) are left with serious scars and wounds for the rest of their lives! Who is going to compensate these thousands of victims, such as the Bodnarius, if the international community continues to turn a blind eye to the aforementioned outrageous conduct of Norway State and its odious actors?

Share your thoughts...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s