Memoirs from my time in the Coastal Party

Erik Strand, 21.04.2025
Latest updated 23.09.2025
Translation of an article in Norwegian published 06.01.2024

Many people have become aware that politics is not what it seems on the surface in formal democracies. Various scandals, some well-known and some known only to those who seek information from other sources than mainstream media, demonstrate that shady forces sabotage what should be a sound democracy.

How one should deal with conditions where shady forces dominate politics in nominal democracies depends on an understanding of the problems. When those in power show corrupt or authoritarian behaviour, what about the alternatives? One should expect better alternatives among grass root members of the ruling party (or ruling parties when there is a coalition) and among opposition parties. However, when corruption and authoritarian politics is widespread, one should also expect the opposite – controlled opposition and useful fools.

The interesting question is how deep the infiltration goes. Unless one is an ‘insider’ – a person deeply involved on the wrong side, it is very hard to tell. I have been a party-political activist in Norway for quite a few years and have some experience which I would like to share with the reader. The compressed story of my involvement in a Norwegian political party for 14 years can be viewed as a case study on how destructive forces pervade party politics. It is not a text that claims to represent academic rigor or to present results that can be easily generalised. I will rather say it is a report on my own observations and should be taken as such.

This text is basically a translation of my memoirs in Norwegian. I have found it necessary to add some more explanation and background in the English version to make it understandable and meaningful for foreign readers. The text is admittedly long, but I do hope that some people will find it worth reading anyway. After all, it deals with an extremely important matter – why meaningful opposition tends to lack or fail. Even though my topic is a small (and now out of function) political party in Norway, I hope my story can provide some inspiration also for foreign readers.

I will guess that readers might reach different conclusions after reading this story. Some will see party political engagement as futile, while some might see the need for people with some decency to join politics. My emphasis here is on what has actually happened, so I will not spend space and time to justify my position. I will encourage political engagement. The concrete impact can be small, but the corrupt forces we are facing need some opposition, and anyone can make a difference. Not everyone should necessarily join party politics. Some people have opinions that makes it awkward for them to join existing parties, an honest position. Others spend their time on documentation or other kinds of activism. But many of you could enter the local chapter of a party close or relatively close to your opinions, voice the need for addressing themes ignored by mainstream politicians and mainstream media, and find out who your friends and foes are. I guess you will meet both.

In the following, the reader will meet a lot of negative examples that I have experiences during my time in the Coastal Party. I will stress that I have also met people who have supported a struggle against corrupt forces in Norway. All county chapters in Eastern Norway (at least when one uses the county division in effect 2020-2024) have at one point supported that I used Fampo’s background material on corruption and abuse of power – a quite strong collection of articles and literature – in presenting the party outwards. That is at least something which shows some willingness to confront corrupt forces.

Methodological issues
As the reader will soon understand, I have met a lot of destructive people as a party-political activist. In most cases, people’s intentions might be ambiguous or at least unprovable. Some people can be real infiltrators with an agenda set by others, while some people are just people with an inflated ego and problems with filling their spare time. Some of these people should be protected against themselves and will not be mentioned here, at the cost of the reader missing some funny stories.

In most cases I will not theorize about what kind of intentions people mentioned have. Such speculation will tend to be insufficient and only detrimental to one’s own case. I will therefore concentrate on presenting the actual events.

In some cases, the topic has touched upon certain dilemmas. I do quote some internal e-mails. This is correspondence between party members that as a general rule should be held in private. This is however not a rule without exceptions. Where internal correspondence reveals a violation of basic democratic principles, it can be justified to quote internal correspondence. I believe that I have landed on the right side when facing such dilemmas. 

Some background.
I was 21 years old in 1995 when I read an interview with Eirik Finne, an engineer and architect who fell into trouble as a whistleblower documenting that a common Norwegian building technique meant increased risk of fire. I took contact with people with connections to the case and soon learnt that there also were other shady cases in Norway. One infamous case was the case of Arnold Juklerød. In 1971 Juklerød discovered that local authorities did not follow the law when a local school in Kragerø municipality was closed down. He was forcibly hospitalised, and one stated reason for the hospitalisation was that he had ‘paranoid false thoughts that could not be corrected’ about local illegal affairs. In 1995 the Department of Church and Education admitted in a letter that Juklerød’s paranoid thoughts represented the truth. Juklerød died in January 1996 and did not live to see Member of Parliament and corruption fighter Erling Folkvord from the far-left party Red Electoral Alliance (today Red) propose a public investigation of this infamous case. Only 6 MPs voted in favour of a public investigation.

In 2009 I decided to join a political party in order to address corrupt cases in Norway. I had by then been a member of Fampo since the organisation was founded at the mental institution where Juklerød was hospitalised, in 1997. I chose to join the Coastal Party. The party’s ideology is a subordinate matter in this context. However, to give the reader a picture I can mention that the Coastal Party was a centrist party supporting the interest of the less populous regions in Norway and opposing Norwegian membership of EEC (consisting of the EU countries plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). The Coastal Party was represented in Parliament from 1997-2005 but had later diminished and from somewhere around 2009, the party was placed in the category ‘others’ in polls.

It began in 2009
I began a party member in the Vestfold County chapter somewhere in 2009. At the General Assembly in CP in Vestfold in 2009 there was presented a proposal – not by me – to arrange a meeting in cooperation with Fampo. This proposal was unanimously approved. The date was set to May 10, 2009, and Fampo’s leader Dag Hiåsen went to the city of Sandefjord in order to hold a presentation. The number of people turning up was not that bad. In all 24 people were present. Even though this was still in the era when CP had its own bar in the polls, the CP was still a small party in Vestfold which did not spend money on advertising the meeting. Much of the advertising consisted of me walking around in Sandefjord handing out leaflets.

During the electoral campaign 2009 I contacted someone in the party’s central administration in order to find out whether someone represented CP in the school debates in Buskerud, a neighbouring county. School debates is a tradition in Norwegian high school (pupils aged 15-19). The parties can attend a debate (at this time all parties that met up, could participate in the debates), and afterwards the pupils vote in a kind of test election, which gains some publicity each electoral year.

I held a suspicion that no one covered the school electoral debates for CP in Buskerud County, and that turned out to be correct. I asked if I could participate for CP, and that was welcome. I contacted two high schools in Buskerud County and announced that I wanted to participate in the debate. At this time, it was a general rule that all participating parties were allowed to participate in the debates.

I have written a summary of my experiences from one of the two high schools, Drammen videregående. I chose to open my speech by referring to the open meeting in Sandefjord, stressing that there were touchy topics that the other parties did not address. My speech was met with wild applause and a fifth place among the parties at Drammen videregående skole.

Another aspect of my appearance at Drammen videregående skole was so notorious that I after the debate could observe that some pupils had mentioned it in their blogs. When I arrived at the place where the debate was arranged at 8 in the morning, I saw that the 11 attending political parties were ordered from left to right in the panel according to where we were perceived to be on a left-right spectrum. CP was by most people regarded as a centrist party. Drammen videregående skole had however placed me on the very right seat in the panel. The person to the left of me represented the infamous list (not a party, but an electoral list) Vigrid, a list widely compared to nazis. A quite demonstrative way of presenting me to the pupils. One can see a picture from the debate here. 

At the General Assembly in CP in Vestfold in 2010, I was elected as a board member. The year after I was elected as cashier for the county chapter.

Electoral campaign 2013
In 2012 I attended CP’s national convention as a delegate from the county chapter in Vestfold. I then knew that there was not much party activity in Buskerud County. In a break during the national convention, I sat next to Dag Hagen Berg. Dag Hagen Berg was not a delegate, but a guest at the national convention. As far as I know he was not elected in any position. He functioned as a kind of secretary within the party. In the protocol from the national convention one could read the following, after 29 delegates being listed: “Guest. 30. Dag Hagen Berg. Party office.” 

During the conversation I said that as there was not that much activity in Buskerud, the party could try me in a relatively high position at the electoral list in the parliamentary election in 2013, and Berg replied something like why not top the list.

It turned out that I topped the list in Buskerud 2013 and got an important and welcome challenge. I think it was on February 24, 2013, there was held a common nomination meeting for most of the county chapters in Eastern Norway, in CP’s office in Oslo. With exceptions for Oslo and Vestfold, and maybe Akershus, there was not much activity in the county chapters in Eastern Norway at that time. I had asked the relevant party members to be allowed to come to Oslo that day in order to further my candidacy, and I was also appointed first candidate in Buskerud.

Without any substantial founding, I conducted a very simple electoral campaign. Hagen Berg told me that I could give him and the party a bill for reasonable travel expenses after the election. The Vestfold chapter borrowed me a nice poster. My campaign was a simple one, where I stood or walked around in some of Buskerud’s towns and villages handing out leaflets produced myself without help from people more skilled with layout. One can see my leaflet here. I addressed corrupt conditions in Norway as issue number one. I also participated in the school debate in 8 high schools in Buskerud, where I said some serious words about conditions in Norway that did not belong in a democracy. My impression was that many of the students found the matter interesting. At least I could talk uninterrupted for 2-3 minutes to a rather large ratio of Buskerud’s high school students. Unfortunately, the opportunity to do the same thing is not there today, as it has become common to invite the established parties only to the school debates.

The result of my campaign was nothing to brag about, but there was a small rise in the number of votes. While CP’s number of votes was halved in the country as a whole, there was a small increase in Buskerud. Only Oppland county witnessed a larger relative increase in CP’s votes.

On October 24, 2013, I was elected as new leader of CP in Vestfold. This was the first time I met Odd Inge Storli. He joined the new board and was active. He was later elected as 1^st deputy member of the party’s Central Board and was later promoted to ordinary Central Board member. Storli would later contribute in a far less constructive way.

As new chapter leader I got a board that was willing to address controversial, while serious, matters. We made a program for the county council election in 2015 with the following proposal:

“The Coastal Party wants the county to take measures in order to inform the public about abuse of power that is not covered by media. By arranging seminars on corruption and abuse of power and inviting people and organisations with knowledge in this field, the county council in Vestfold can give an important contribution to a real democracy”.

This proposal gave me an excuse for traveling to schools in Vestfold and say some serious words to the students about Norwegian conditions, of course accompanied with local issues.

During autumn 2015 I moved to Akershus county. I contacted the party’s central administration and asked for a list of party members in Akershus in order to create a local chapter. I also stepped out of my role as chapter leader in Vestfold, and Berit Wiersholm took over as new chapter leader.

During 2015 and 2016 several people expressed discontent with the party’s Central Board. Later on, we realised that the Central Board did not even deliver the required accounting information to Statistics Norway (SSB). A consequence of this failure was that while CP got NOK 306 912 in support from the state (by number of votes) in 2016, the party got NOK 0 in 2017. This constituted a not so pleasant gift to the Central Board that was to take over. The person who had access to the party’s bank account and could have avoided this disaster, was party leader Bengt Stabrun Johansen. Accounting for earlier years showed that he and Party Secretary Sergej Alexander Munkvold had both received a relatively large honorary for doing quite little. The Central Board that took over, changed this practice and worked for free.

I had seen that CP had an account on Twitter (now X) with around 250 followers. This account had not been used since 09.09.2013. It had also not been used between 26.08.09 and 25.10.09. It was difficult to find out who had access to the account. After promising not to publish anything before it was clear who should administer the account, I got a green light from the party leadership to see if it was possible to get the password. I do not remember how, but I finally got the password.

In retrospect I realise that I should have gotten a green light to administer and use the Twitter account. Odd Inge Storli, who had a lower formal position and shorter time in the party, had already been given access to the party’s national Facebook page.

After several people having pushed for a national convention, an extraordinary national convention was arranged 2-3.10.2016 at Gardermoen. I was elected new Party Secretary. Per Roger Vikten, who had been deputy party leader, was elected as new party leader after a very narrow vote against former MP and party founder Steinar Bastesen. The chapter leader in Rogaland, Wenche I. Sola, was elected political deputy party leader. My impression was that she was one of those who pushed for electing a new Central Board, as was the case with the chapter in Vestfold. Ann-Birgith Wærnes was elected new organisational deputy leader. The new Central Board also had the following board members: Berit Wiersholm, Geir Finne, Ahmed Warsame, Yngve Larsen, Harry Halleland and Egil Fjellstad. Solveig Wickstrand represented the youth organisation, and Odd Inge Storli was elected first deputy board member.

While I appreciated Wenche I. Sola’s engagement for electing a new Central Board, there were some discontent with her behaviour. She posted a lot of posts on CP’s Facebook page with the opening “The Coastal Party’s opinion is”. These posts had a tendency to reflect Sola’s personal opinion and not something CP held as a position or had considered. In 2018, the Central Board made a suspension decision towards Sola. I will not delve into the background here. After the party’s statutes the Central Board can, with 2/3 of the votes, suspend a person with an elected position in the party if there are qualified reasons that the person should resign. The decision can be appealed to the National Board.

During the conflict between Sola and the rest of the Central Board, Sola made up some creative accusations against me. I will start by explaining some of the background. In 2018, I had moved to Oslo. At that time there was no activity worth mentioning in Oslo. The Oslo County chapter had not even delivered a list before the time limit before the parliamentary election in 2017. Hence Oslo was one out of two counties where CP had no list in the 2017 election. Before the bad election result in 2017, where CP did not get 500 votes in any county, all that was required for participating in the election was nominatiing a list and deliver it with the signatures of two board members in the county,

I contacted the chapter leader in Oslo and asked if she was willing to summon to a general assembly, so that the members could elect a county chapter that could deliver the required accounting to Statistics Norway, in order that the county chapter could get money from the state. I did not meet any overt negativity, but nothing happened. As the time limit for delivering information to Statistics Norway drew nearer, I sent an e-mail to the chapter leader and advised her to resign, so that one could hold a democratic election and choose a new board. I even contacted a former board member in Oslo who could inform me that he could not remember any General Assembly being held since 2013, 5 years earlier. According to CP’s statutes, a county chapter is considered closed down if there has not been any activity for 5 years. I called the party leader and got a green light to summon to a meeting in order to elect an interim board.

We elected an interim board with new and motivated members. I did however realise that not everybody appreciated that I had initiated an interim board. This was my first encounter with at political culture where elected party activists just occupied their positions without doing much or holding new elections as required by the party’s statutes.

Then political deputy party leader, Wenche I. Sola, reacted to me daring to summon all party members in Oslo County only 5 years after the latest general assembly. Before the party’s central board meeting scheduled in Oslo May 12-13, 2018, she wrote among other things the following:

“The central board/persons in the central board; Erik Strand, has acted disloyally when he has summoned the members of the Coastal Party in Oslo, which already has a legally elected board. This is done behind the back of Torhild Helliesen, leader of the Coastal Party in Oslo. She has not got information about this meeting by Erik Strand/the Coastal Party/the Central Board, so that these actions are against democratic rules and the Coastal Party’s regulations. Furthermore, Erik Strand has contacted and visited a board member in Oslo in order to gain support for his actions, behind Torhild Helliesen’s back something that constitutes a disloyal and antidemocratic behaviour.

 As deputy political leader I view this as a grave violation both against Torhild Helliesen, who is legally elected by the General Assembly in the Coastal Party in Oslo, as well as towards democratic rules and regulations in the Coastal Party. One cannot simply do as one will if one wishes to occupy a county chapter. There has been much turbulence in the Coastal Party for many years, and far from everything has functioned smoothly and not functioned as it should in a democratic party”.

Sola continues: 

“Due to the conditions that have been in the Coastal party the later years, I can understand that Torhild Helliesen has acted as she did, postponing summoning for a new General Assembly, waiting for the Coastal Party to become more like it was before, when things worked and one had active and skilled people who cooperated and supported each other, were active and wanted each other’s best.

Such behaviour and poor judgement as have been displayed here, where one goes behind the back of the leader of a county chapter in Oslo and even tries to create an interim board where there already exists a legally elected board and a county leader?

The central board/Erik Strand has summoned the members of the Coastal party in Oslo during the meeting in Oslo May 12-13. 2018. This is done behind the back of Torhild Helliesen, leader of the Coastal Party in Oslo. She who has not been informed about this meeting by Erik Strand/the Coastal Party/the central board, so that this also goes against democratic rules and regulations in the Coastal party.

Abuse of power in the Coastal party where one uses antidemocratic regulations in order to gain power. Erik Strand is one of the few elected persons in the Coastal Party with access to the list of party members, something he seems to have taken advantage of in a negative way.

I have already commented upon the claim that my actions were disloyal or antidemocratic. This is about a county chapter where there had not been held a general assembly for years. In a democratic organisation, members shall not have to wait for years for a “county leader” to be merciful enough to allow members to elect a new board at a general assembly.

The allegation that I had invited party members in Oslo to meet the central board during the central board meeting in May 2018 is solidly rooted in Sola’s fantasy. The truth is that I had asked if it was OK that one member living in the neighbouring county Akershus, who was interested in the same topics as I am, showed up during lunch one of the days for an informal talk. That is something fundamentally different from what Sola made up.  

Two positive things were part of the outcome of these things. Wenche I. Sola got an occasion to show her true colours. And there was established a new and functioning county chapter in Oslo, with a board that said yes to use heavy material from Fampo in an open letter to the members of the city council in Oslo.

The local election in Oslo 2019 became far from a breakthrough, but we got more votes than in any election in Oslo since 2005. And for the first time in my memory, the party was visible in Oslo’s main street during the electoral campaign. Due to having to collect 500 signatures in order to participate in the election in a county – or 300 in a municipality (fewer in less populated municipalities), a job was done in order to be on the ballot in three out of the then four counties in Eastern Norway – Vestfold and Telemark, Viken and Oslo. In addition, the Coastal Party was on the ballot in the municipalities Lurøy and Tromsø. There was a slight increase in the number of votes in all the three counties, probably due to the issue of wind power.

The case of Tromsø deserves a separate comment. One needed in 300 signatures in order to participate in the election in Tromsø, and 500 signatures in order to participate in the election in Troms and Finnmark county. Outsiders could ask why one did not do the job in order to create a list in the entire county, where Tromsø was the county capital, as there existed a county chapter in Troms and Finnmark.

I have understood that personal conflict constitutes a considerable share of the explanation. The chapter leader at that time was Ahmed Warsame. Warsame was elected as chapter leader in 2017. Other board members in Troms and Finnmark wanted board meetings to be held. According to § 14 C in the Coastal Party’s statutes, one third of the board members can demand that there is held a board meeting. Warsame did however not meet this demand.

I was also contacted by persons in Nordland County who wanted political activity in their county. Then chapter leader Yngve Larsen, who also was the party’s deputy leader (CP had decided to elect only one deputy leader at the party’s National Convention in 2017) did however not do anything in order to hold a General Assembly in the county. If there had not been a county chapter in Nordland, a sufficient number of people could have created a county chapter. The existence of a county chapter was however an impediment to party activity. In the autumn of 2020, the time limit for collecting signatures for the 2021 parliamentary election drew nearer. As there were people who were interested in creating a county chapter, I sent an e-mail to the central board on 27.09.20, where I wrote, among other things:

“I see that we have received a comment to our latest Facebook post. The comment says that we must start activity in Nordland County. I am not allowed to mention names, but I can mention that I have been contacted by people who want to be active and contribute in Nordland. As there has not been a General Assembly since 2018 (?) they have not been able to participate (I do not know if there had been a decision to hold a General Assembly every other year). Off course, no one can demand to be members of a board or be nominated. A member should however be entitled to being electable (save in those cases where a person should be thrown out of the party). If people are not electable, we get a situation like we had in Oslo half a year ago [What I meant and should have written was “in Oslo two years ago”].

No one pointed out any factual errors in what I wrote.

The end of the story was that a county chapter in Nordland was created. It did however happen only after someone outside the county board had sent an invitation to create an interim board, and the central board decided to summon to a meeting in order to create an interim board.

Even a fourth unit within the party exemplified a practice where people sat in their positions without summoning to a general assembly. This unit was the youth organisation. I do not know when a general assembly was held before 2019. At the CP’s website, there was a list of board members in the Coastal Party’s Youth (CPY). On one occasion I had to call some of the listed board members. One of the board members whom I called was surprised. This person had never had anything to do with the CPY and had not been eligible for a youth organisation for a large number of years.

As time passed by, activity and elected members disappeared from the CPY. The situation was discussed at CP’s National Convention in 2019. It was proposed that the National Convention delegated to the Central Board to give one representative from the youth the right to meet and speak in the Central Board until one had elected a youth organisation which could elect its own representative. The proposal was unanimously accepted.

On May 23, 2019, an interim board consisting of three persons was elected for CPY, with Marie E. Wærnes (daughter of party leader Ann Birgith B. Wærnes) as new leader. Things looked promising, but the election of an interim board was not followed by a new election.

At CP’s National Board meeting in June 2022 someone spoke about the fact that CPY had not held any general assembly, meetings for the members or held any election since May 2019. It was mentioned that some youth wanted to be active. I supported the person who raised the issue. I cannot remember verbatim what I said, but I remember that I said that in a democratic organisation, members should be allowed to elect a board. That should have been obvious but was not.

In an e-mail to the members of the Central Board, including the CPY leader, I pointed to two things. One of them was a decision made at the Central Board’s meeting in April, where we had decided to answer an invitation from the Industry and Business Party regarding future cooperation. The party leader was given the task to invite the Industry and Business Party to a Teams meeting for discussing cooperation.

The other issue I raised was the situation in the CPY. I wrote: “Then it is the CPY, an issue raised at the National Board meeting. Will there be done anything in order to summon to a meeting for all paying members?”

I received an answer from the party leader on September 30, with copy to the other board members. I shall be careful quoting the answer, but some of the content is of interest. The party leader said that there had been much turbulence in the party, and that there were persons involved in destructive activities [I choose not making this part more precise] and that the new Central Board was not yet registered in Enhetsregisteret register (which was due to a complaint without substance). Regarding CPY, the party leader replied that what she answered, was not influenced by her daughter being CPY leader. She started the part of the mail regarding CPY by writing: “CPY was not an issue at the National Board meeting in June”. That is by itself correct. Formally, the CPY was not an issue. As mentioned before, someone had asked for a democratic election, and I had supported that. Even if I did not have a formal post on the agenda or any decision to refer to, I held the opinion that it was a reasonable question to ask when the request for an election / general assembly in CPY would be followed up.

The party leader proceeded to write that CPY could wait until we had cleared up the situation around CP and the Central Board. At this point I owe to mention that she also wrote that the youth should decide this matter themselves.

What the party leader wrote about destructive actions was no nonsense. I will come back to that. I still hold the opinion that even though the situation is though, a party and a party’s youth organisation should, as a minimum, hold democratic elections. When I left CP in September 2023, there had still not been held a General Assembly in CPY, and I know nothing about preparations for such a meeting. The latest meeting open to all members in the CPY that I have heard about, is the startup meeting on May 23, 2019.

Odd Inge Storli
At this point, I have to go back in time in order to introduce some persons. As mentioned before, I had known Odd Inge Storli since I took over as leader of CP in Vestfold in October 2013. Some parts of his actions raised some questions. Storli was an active contributor to CP’s Facebook account. Not everyone appreciated what he posted on behalf of the party. Storli and I were often interested in the same political issues, although we approached them differently in content and form. On one occasion he used the Facebook account to refer to, and support, Rune Fardal, a critic of the Norwegian Child Protection Services (CPS). There are very valid reasons for being critical towards the Norwegian CPS. I had however followed Fardal’s work and understood that he was not a person one should promote (link to a collection of articles in Norwegian here). I wrote an internal e-mail where I gave the advice not to use Fardal’s articles. Even though I provided what I myself see as valid arguments and relevant links, another referral to Fardal, written by Storli, popped up on CP’s Facebook account.

While Storli was ready to use Fardal as a referral, he was not equally eager to use referrals to Fampo and Fampo’s website in Norwegian. Before the Central Board meeting on 09.10.2018, I had delivered a proposal to use material from Fampo’s website and background information on CP’s website. I had presented the idea at a Central Board meeting the year before without furthering a concrete proposal. I had chosen a careful wording, as party members and people in general would not be that acquainted with Fampo’s material. Storli did not support my proposal, and it was rejected with the narrowest possible margin. I mention here that I came up with a similar proposal at the Central Board meeting on 22-23.04.22. Storli was then no longer a Central Board member, and I wanted to see if I could get a majority support the proposal. At this occasion I was the only person voting in favour of it.

I was not the only one who reacted to Storli’s behaviour. Before a Central Board meeting in October 2018, the county chapter in Vestfold and Telemark proposed to suspend Storli as a member of the Central Board. While I did not see that there were sufficient grounds for suspension at that moment, I became thankful for the Vestfold and Telemark chapter’s proposal. After the proposal was delivered, one could see a clear change in Storli’s behaviour. I will for several reasons not delve into details here. But I will quote one telling e-mail from Storli. The Central Board chose to suspend Storli, and the suspension was upheld by the National Board (which is the appeal entity by the statutes) on January 16, 2020.

On January 29,2020, several people in CP, including me, received an e-mail from Storli. Much of the content should not be quoted, but I will quote the following concerning CP’s Facebook accounts:

“I will conclude by saying something about FB pages.

The main Facebook account, Troms and Finnmark, Viken, CP Vestfold and Telemark and Sandefjord are created by me privately. This means that I own these pages, and that CP only borrows space in these social media.

Due to misplaced trust, party leader Ann Birgith Wærnes became administrator for some of these pages. It turns out that I was stripped of my administrative roles without due cause because of illegitimate suspension and exclusion. And I was removed before any final decisions were made. That means judged in advance.

CP has never made any decisions to create such Facebook pages but has maybe discussed using them. Therefore, one can say that party leader, or someone party leader has cooperated with, have stolen the pages they now control.

I can give the pages I control back to CP if CP is willing to pay for them.

The posts that I have promoted has given CP good PR. And my work on these pages and other places have made people talk about the party in a positive way.

I find it reasonable, after all, that CP pays NOK 3 000 to get control after the splendid job I have done. In the case that CP does not want to pay and prefers to create new pages one can inform that these pages are altered so that they no longer represent CP.

I grant Party leader one week’s time limit to answer concerning this thing about the FB pages. If I do not receive any answer, I interpret the lack of answer as a sign that CP wants to create their own pages”.

End of quote

Storli’s accusations will not be commented upon here. What is interesting here is the following: Odd Inge Storli creates Facebook accounts for a party and several chapters. Afterwards, other people participate in updating these pages and invest time together with him or replacing him. As the one who created these pages, he finds himself entitled to keep them unless he gets a “ransom”. He does this in a context where Storli being the first one to create a Facebook account for a chapter meaning that there is no legitimate reason for other party members to do the same.

Luckily Storli was hindered from taking over the national Facebook account, which had reached a couple of thousand followers with the help of other people than Storli. But some chapters lost their Facebook account due to Storli.

This became the end of Storli’s engagement as a Central Board member. I conclude with remarking that Storli seems to be an active man with many contacts. A comment by Storli at the website “Stopp Smartmålerne” (Stop Smart Meters) is no longer available. But here one finds a comment article by Storli on one of the most well-known Norwegian alternative media, Derimot.no.

In 2020, Storli became active in founding the Constitution Party, which became a fiasco. In this project, he was helped by André Henriksen, a person who also made himself visible in CP. Henriksen was elected organisational deputy leader in CP in Vestfold and Telemark in 2019.

An unauthorized summoning
On December 18,2020, a lot of party members received a weird and rather unwelcome e-mail which summoned to a National Board meeting. The mail was sent from the weird e-mail address “Kystpartiet I Austfold” (kystpartietiaustfold@yahoo.no – the CP in Austfold. “Austfold is a quite unorthodox spelling of Norway’s southeasternmost county, Østfold). Attached to the e-mail was a summoning to a National Board meeting. According to § 8-2 in CP’s statutes, the National Board holds its meetings at the time that the National Board itself decides, when the parliamentary member(s) decide, or the Central Board or 2/3 of the county chapters decide. Three people had signed the summoning. One of them later claimed to have nothing to do with this. The two others were (sic):

“CP in Østfold
represented by Board member Sergej Munkvold

CP in Vestfold and Telemark
Andre Henriksen”

These were two (by any means no more than three) people with no formal competence for summoning a meeting in the highest party organ in the time between the general assemblies. Sergej Munkvold, who was Party Secretary until October 2016, did not reside in Østfold. As far as I remember, he lived in Oslo, but on one occasion he moved to Akershus. When it comes to André Henriksen, one thing is for sure. His county chapter wanted nothing to do with this bullshit, as the chapter leader made absolutely clear in an e-mail.

These persons, who found themselves competent to summon to a meeting in the party’s highest organ between general assemblies, provided kind of justification for doing so. I choose quoting extensively from their summoning:

“To the members of the National Board:
Coastal Party in Troms and Finnmark
Coastal Party in Nordland (due to the chapter leader’s incompetence, the summoning is sent to county leader Wenche Kristiansen)
Coastal Party in Trøndelag
Coastal Party in Møre and Romsdal
Coastal Party in Vestfold and Telemark
Coastal Party in Østfold
Coastal Party in Oslo
Coastal Party in Viken (former Buskerud and Akershus)
Coastal Party’s Youth

Summoning to a National Board meeting
Referring to e-mails regarding the demand furthered by OddInge Storli for suspending several Central Board members, as well as information that Odd Inge Storli has been suspended by the Central Board without the Central Board having handled the incompetence objections towards the majority of the Central Board members.

The undersigned stress that it is a serious action to suspend members. The demands that are set by the statutes have to be followed, and incompetence objections have to be handled before one handles the grounds for suspension. It therefore seems that the Central Board has not handled the demands for suspension correctly – neither the proposal for suspending Odd Inge Storli nor the proposal for suspending themselves.

It is obvious that those members of the Central Board who have been proposed suspended, are incompetent in handling the proposal for their own suspension.

As the proposals concerning the suspension of several members of the Central Board are connected to the same conditions and have the same justification, the questions of incompetence cannot be judged separately, but have to be judged as a whole. This means that there are not enough competent members of the Central Board who can make valid decisions according to the statutes.

This implies that the National Board, both as an organ superior to the Central Board and as being the organ that can interpret the statutes between the general assemblies, is summoned to an extraordinary meeting in order to handle the question regarding how to handle this situation. The undersigned views it as natural that the National Board appoints an extraordinary Central Board which is assigned the task of judging if there are reasons for suspension of members of the Central Board, including Odd Inge Storli. This extraordinary Central Board is assigned the task of investigating the case and present proposals for decisions in a new National Board meeting.

As the Central Board is incompetent in handling the procedural questions, as well as because CP cannot have a long-lasting unclear situation surrounding the Central Board, we as members of the National Board take care of the summoning to an extraordinary National Board meeting.

Friday December 20, 2019, 6.00 pm (telephone meeting, additional information will be sent)

1. Summoning and agenda
2. How to handle the proposals for suspending several Central Board members, and eventually: The election of an extraordinary Central Board in order to evaluate the suspension proposals.
3. Deciding the date for a new National Board meeting and/or an extraordinary National Convention”

One should take note of number 3 on the agenda above – finding a date for a new National Board meeting and/or national convention. If someone who claim to be a National Board summon to an extraordinary national convention, those who rightfully rejected this national convention, would typically not turn up. In such a case, a random group of attendees can write a protocol and send a message concerning a new Central Board to the bureaucrats in Enhetsregisteret. Enhetsregisteret is not supposed to do a thorough control in such cases, but it shall conduct a simple control of the formalities. If someone succeed in being registered in Enhetsregisteret, they will obtain a legitimacy when dealing with third parties, like banks and Internet providers. They will obtain such legitimacy regardless of their right to be registered as the Central Board. We will soon see that this kind of false legitimacy turned out to be a very real problem. It this moment, the central leadership managed to deal with the troublemakers, and the troublemakers did not do any other harm than making noise and being a nuisance.

I find it right to comment the way in which these troublemakers sought to justify their summoning. They argued that the Central Board members were incompetence. Incompetence is in general not something one should take lightly in politics. It is true that a Central Board member is incompetent in the case that he or she is proposed suspended/excluded, and that was off course the practice within CP.

It is more complicated if someone proposes to suspend the entire Central Board, save oneself. Taking the case to a higher organ (the National Board) would deprive the person(s) proposed excluded from the right to appeal the decision. An “extraordinary Central Board” is not mentioned in the statutes and would imply a kind of arbitrariness as there were not enough deputy Central Board members to make the Central Board able to make a decision.

As I see it, the only acceptable solution in a case where one finds valid reasons for changing the entire Central Board, is to do that through election, not through arbitrary members being able to elect an extraordinary Central Board.

Tom Idar Wangberg
Another party activist who made himself visible in a not to positive way, is Tom Idar Wangberg from Akershus county (part of Viken 2020-2024). At CP in Viken’s general assembly in April 2020 he was elected deputy leader. Before that a couple of meetings for all members in CP in Viken had been arranged in his home.

As time passed by, several people reacted negatively towards some aspects of Wangberg’s behaviour. In December 2019 CP received a rather odd kind of attention from the leader of the highly controversial political party the Alliance, Hans Jørgen Lysglimt Johansen. A screenshot taken on 29.12.2019 shows Lysglimt Johansen seeking formal roles for CP in Partiportalen (The Party Portal) in all the three counties where CP was on the ballot in the county council election in 2019, as well as the CPY. I choose informing that the screenshot is somewhat edited in order to hide some internal information. The Party Portal is a digital device by which political parties and party chapters can report about their economy each year within June 1^st. Doing so is a legal requirement for receiving governmental party funding.

When the leader of a competing party enters Partiportalen and applies for roles as the one who shall report on behalf of the party, one smells a rat, especially when this is done by the leader of an extremist party. During approximately the same time, Tom Idar Wangberg entered Partiportalen and applied for a role for the CP in Viken. I do not know exactly when Lysglimt and Wangberg applied for roles, but the screenshot mentioned above is taken on 29.12.19. I have looked through old e-mails and seen that the party leader found it necessary to use the New Year’s Eve in 2019 to ask Wangberg why he applied for a role. She mentioned that Wangberg was only contact person in Ski, and that the county leader Terje Røberg already had a role on behalf of the CP in Viken in Partiportalen.

Tom Idar Wangberg replied as follows:

“Hello.

I do not disagree in any way.
I was only in there looking a little around.

But it is true, I have no role in the CP in Viken save as an ordinary member. I think it sounds like a good and reasonable policy.

With best regards
Tom Idar Wangberg
[Mobile number]»

It might be a coincidence that Lysglimt and Wangberg applied for roles in Partiportalen almost at the same time. Wangberg’s explanation does however appear a bit strange. When one is interested in politics, there are many things that can be interesting to look at. For most people, Partiportalen belongs to the less interesting things. And if one enters Partiportalen, one does not have to apply for a role.

As time passed by, problems with cooperation within the CP in Viken came to the surface. On 29.03.21 the Central Board decided to send an e mail to the CP in Viken with the following content:

«To the CP in Viken county

The Central Board refers to the things that have happened the latest days in Viken with e-mail correspondence back and forth between different parties. Given this background, the Central Board has decided to scrutinize the county board and has looked at the protocol from the general assembly on April 25, 2020. The Central Board will point out that the elections done at the general assembly cannot be accepted.

The Central Board refers to § 14B point 5 bullet point 11 in the statutes: «Elect a board consisting of at least 5 members. The board shall consist of leader, deputy leader, secretary and at least two board members. The general assembly can decide the number of board members and deputy members, with a minimum of 5 board members.
The Central Board remarks that the decision to elect the leader for two years was not done according to the statutes and therefore not legal. We refer to §14 B point 7. «Leader and at most half of the other board members are elected for one period. The other members of the board are elected for 2 periods. The other elections are for 1 period. The board should have an odd number of members. »

It follows that the elected board is not legally elected. As a consequence, the Central Board finds that the board meeting on April 8 cannot be held and that the board is to be dissolved immediately.

The Central Board will use the membership list and summon to an extraordinary general assembly with only one case at the agenda: election of a new board according to the statutes.

We refer to §14B in the statutes: General assembly point 3. An extraordinary general assembly is summoned within 2 weeks in advance when higher organs demand so, the country board demands so, or at least 2/3 of the local chapters demand so. Only cases listed in the summoning to the extraordinary general assembly can be handled. The extraordinary general assembly can decide that a new general assembly shall be summoned in order to handle other questions.

I dissented on this decision. It is true that there was done mistakes according to the statutes when the chapter leader was elected for two years. I found it sufficient to elect leader anew after one year as the decision to elect the leader for two years was invalid. I found the Central Board’s decision unnecessary formalistic.

On 13.04.21 there was held an extraordinary general assembly in the CP in Viken, where Terje Røberg, Tom Idar Wangberg and Karina Hyggen Amland were elected as an interim board. It was decided to arrange an ordinary general assembly on 03.06.21. At this general assembly it became clear that one could not elect a new board (not enough board members). Terje Røberg was going to continue as contact person.

On May 12, 2022, the party leader received an e-mail from Wangberg with the following question:

«Hello

Is there any CP in Viken?

With best regard
Tom Idar Wangberg

[Mobile number]»

This was a natural question to ask for a contact person in a municipality in Viken. The question was however somewhat weird, as Wangberg was present at the meeting where the attempt to reestablish the county chapter failed.

Wangberg then took the case in his own hands. On June 16, 2022, he summoned to an extraordinary general assembly in Viken, and this was held on June 30. As this was a meeting in order to start up a county chapter in a county where there was no county chapter, the correct thing to do would be to summon to a meeting 6 weeks in advance. As deputy leader in the county chapter the year before, Wangberg had legal access to the list of members in the county according to the party’s rules for handling of personal data. He did not have this access at the time of the summoning, and the summoning was sent to some members only. Wangberg encouraged the Central Board to forward the summoning to all members of the CP in Viken. The Central Board declined to do so, and not all members were notified.

The protocol from the extraordinary general assembly on 30.06.22 talks about a meeting at the library in Ski, Viken, where some members participated digitally. There was elected a kind of board, but without enough paying members.

Let us go back in time. On May 12, 2022, Tom Idar Wangberg asked if there was a county chapter in Viken. On June 30, 2o22 there was arranged a so called extraordinary general assembly where Wangberg was elected as chapter leader. On June 15, 2022, Wanberg sent an e-mail with the title «Letter to Terje». In this letter, with the headline «Information about the suspension from the position as county leader in Viken», one could read some bullshit accusations against Terje Røberg, contact person and former chapter leader in Viken. I will not go into all details, but choose to quote one paragraph:

«Regarding the CP in Viken, the county board point at our letter to you regarding economic conditions and how you have fulfilled your role as county leader. The county board remarks that you have not responded to this letter We hereby inform you about the county board’s decision to suspend you as county leader, a decision founded in § 18-1 in the statutes. The decision is effective immediately. The county board made its decision in meeting June 10 this year under case 7: »

On May 12, 2022, Wangberg had sent the party leader an e-mail with a question regarding whether there existed «any CP in Viken». A month later he was «functioning county leader in Viken». One cannot follow the party’s statutes and proceed as fast as that. Not only was Wangberg functioning leader; he was also the leader of a county chapter that found itself entitled to suspend the county leader (who by the way did not consider himself county leader anymore, but as contact person). According to the statutes, the Central Board is the only entity that can suspend elected persons in the party. One finds the relevant rule in the statutes’ § 16. In the letter Wangberg referred to the statutes § 18-1. This regulation says the following:

«§ 18-1. The Central Board can decide cases that are under the jurisdiction of other entities, but not altering of the statutes, when there is not time for presenting the case for the actual entity without harming rightful interests. For a valid decision, ¾ of the Central Board has to support the decision. The decision shall be presented as soon as possible for the first coming National Board meeting / National Convention. By the same means, the county board can decide cases that are under the jurisdiction of other entities within the party in the county, including entities subordinate to the county chapter. A notification about the decision shall be presented to the Central Board and the general assembly as soon as possible.

Even if one reads this regulation many times, one will not find any justification for the county board suspending their leader. And that goes well with Wangberg’s letter, which was bullshit from beginning until end. I know the work Terje Røberg has done within the party, like almost single-handedly collecting the 500 signatures needed for participating in the municipal election in Viken in 2019. The award for good work in politics is often a lot of intrigues.

Attempted coup and coup
CP held its national convention on March 13-14, 2021. Due to covid 19 measures the national convention was held as an Internet meeting. The election of a Central Board was mostly a re-election, and I was re-elected as party secretary. Anne Hilleren, who had started up a county chapter in Vestland, was elected 3rd deputy member. Anne Hilleren had earlier been the Centre Party’s 13th candidate in the parliamentary election in Hordaland County in 2017. She was elected as one of two people to sign the protocol from the national convention.

When a national convention is over and a new Central Board is elected, the new board has to be registered in Enhetsregisteret. This is necessary in order for the new board to do things like getting a credit card. Hilleren did not sign the protocol before 22.04.2022, a thing that was necessary in order to become registered in Enhetsregisteret. I will not delve into details about the reason for the long-delayed signature, but disagreement about what should be written in the protocol was part of it.

When the signatures were there, registering a new board should be a formality only. It turned out to be not that easy. On 22.06.202 Enhetsregisteret received a complaint on the registration of a new Central Board in CP from Kathy Fjellstad. At that time, I had not heard much from Kathy Fjellstad. I knew her name from the list of board members in Troms / Troms and Finnmark. I had never observed any activity from her side before she out of nothing delivered a complaint to Enhetsregisteret. I choose to quote some of the content of an e-mail from Kathy Fjellstad to Enhetsregisteret:

«Some remarks concerning the issue and why the board that was elected at the national convention 2021 is not correctly elected according to the statutes they themselves have decided on:

Good example of manipulation concerning those entitled to vote. Those who participated in the latest municipal election, ref point 6 in the summoning, should have one delegate with voting rights. Tromsø should have had one delegate, so then one can wonder why Warsame was denied voting right??? Oslo participated in the municipal election and should have had one delegate.
This manipulation of delegates with voting rights happened in both 2019 and 2021. »

Some comments are needed here. The CP’s statutes § 6 decides who the delegates to the national convention are. According to § 6 point it includes one delegate from each municipal chapter that has participated in the latest municipal election and delivered accounting and annual report for the last year.

In 2019, three municipal chapters in the CP participated with a list in the election – Oslo, Tromsø and Lurøy. Nothing suggests that Kathy Fjellstad had checked which of these chapters had delivered accounting and an annual report. I represented the CP in Oslo. The reason that we did not send a delegate was first and foremost that activity declined during 2020 and that there were not enough people who wanted to continue as board members. And the work in order to collect 500 signatures demanded a lot of efforts.

Nevertheless, the fact that Oslo did not send a delegate was used as an argument against the legitimacy of the national convention, even if this was Oslo’s own lack of sending a delegate.

Enhetsregisteret also received an e-mail from Anne Hilleren on 26.06.2022. Some of the things Hilleren wrote about was not relevant for the question oof whether the new Central Board was legally elected and should be registered in Enhetsregisteret. Among the things she had something to say about, was economical transactions in CP in Troms and Finnmark. On March 8, 2019, CP in Troms and Finnmark decided, after a proposal from CP in Alta municipality, to transfer NOK 250 000 to the CP nationally in order to strengthen the party’s economy. Alta is the municipality where the CP’s leader Wærnes lived. The decision is mentioned in the protocol from the meeting. The decision was also a topic – as information – at the national convention in 2019, where CP’s chapter leader in Troms and Finnmark, Ahmed Warsame, was present without protesting to this information. Nevertheless, several people uttered unfounded allegations of embezzlement of NOK 255 000 from the county chapter to the central organisation.

In her e-mail, Hilleren wrote that she during May/June 2022 had been aware of so many deviations that she wondered if her signature eon the protocol was valid. She followed up with a lot of allegations, of which I shall comment some.

Like Kathy Fjellstad, Hilleren commented that local chapters that participated in the 2019 elections were not present at the national convention, something that I have commented upon above. She also wrote that her county chapter should have had a representative at the national convention, something they were denied (against one vote). In order to be entitled to a delegate, a county chapter needs 15 paying members. The CP in Vestland had 14 paying members at the end of 2020. I had access to CP’s bank account and can confirm this. According to the GDPR rules I have no longer access to this, but Hilleren has not been able to confirm that more than 14 people were paying members.

Among other creative allegations concerning the 2021 national convention, Hilleren presented the allegation that the election committee that had been in work before the national convention, had consisted of one member only. Hilleren wrote:

«The electoral committee consisted of Central Board member Harry Halleland only. Received proposals were not included, and no proposals have been distributed in advance, which makes one question whether this is manipulation”.

The protocol from a meeting in the National Board on 19.20.10.2019 shows that there was elected an electoral committee consisting of three members and two deputy members, after the 2019 national convention had delegated the election of a national committee. One of the members left the committee, but I am sure he will also confirm having been a part of the committee, and that Hilleren’s allegations that the electoral committee consisted of one member only is bullshit.

In order to make a long story short, I mention that Enhetsregisteret declined to register the new Central Board after these complaints and e-mails. CP hired a lawyer in order to file a new complaint, and the decision was changed so that the new board was registered.

Even though I will not go deeper into the issue of registration of the Central Board elected at the 2021 national convention, I will quote from an e-mail sent by the party’s founder, Steinar Bastesen, on 12.03.23. I quote the conclusion of the e-mail, as it is the signature that is interesting here. From Bastesen’s e-mail:

«Because the complaint regarding the central chapter has bearing on the unfounded messages to Enhetsregisteret concerning deleting the county chapters in Troms and Finnmark, we ask for our complaint regarding the overruling by Partiregisteret [The Party Register], is sent to the department’s handling of these messages.

With best regards
Steinar Bastesen
on behalf of CP’s County chapters in Nordland, Trøndelag and Oslo»

It is my impression that many people who are critical towards Norwegian authorities have respect for Steinar Bastesen. Whatever good contribution this former MP has made in the past, I have to regret to say that the late Bastesen did not contribute much good to politics. After the county chapter had been non-existent for a while, I was elected leader of an interim board in Oslo on 21.02.23, and no one in that board had given Bastesen the mandate to speak on behalf of us. The county chapter in Bastesen’s own county, Nordland, also distanced itself from Bastesen’s letter – as confirmed by an email to Enhetsregisteret by CP in Nordland’s legally and democratically elected leader on 19.04.23. In Trøndelag there were not many enough paying members to start up a county chapter.

In 2022 there were furthered demands for a national convention being held in the Coastal Party. Those who furthered this demand, claimed that they represented a large enough number of county chapters to be able to demand a national meeting according to the party statutes. The party leadership dismissed the request, stating that county chapters involved in this demand were not founded in a way that could be accepted (not all members being summoned, not enough paying members in the board).

On October 28, 2022, an e-mail was sent by someone who claimed to be chapter leaders in Viken (Tom Idar Wangberg) and Troms and Finnmark (Ahmed Warsame) demanded that there was held an extraordinary national convention. They claimed that they represented 2/3 of the existing county chapter and therefore could demand an extraordinary national convention according to the statutes. As the Central Board did not recognise these county chapters as legally started up, the Central Board declined the request. As to the CP in Viken, I have described the background above.

When the Central Board declined to do as Wangberg and Warsame demanded, they took the case in their own hands. On December 5, 2022, they summoned to an extraordinary National Board meeting on December 19, 2022. This National Board meeting should then prepare for a national convention. Wangberg and Warsame even found themselves entitled to decide who should not participate at the national convention. I quote from the summoning:

«As those who were elected as Central Board members in 2017 have not taken initiatives in order to further the interests of the party, the Coastal Party in Troms og Finnmark and the Coastal party in Viken finds it necessary to do the summoning, even though the statutes say that the Central Board is responsible for summoning to a National Board meeting».

Early in 2023 the Coastal Party’s leadership received an e-mail from Enhetsregisteret. Someone had tried to register a new central leadership in the party. The case handler correctly pointed out that the attempt to register a new board should be declined, as the protocol according to which the new Central Board was to be registered, was a protocol from a National Board meeting, not a national convention.

The person who attempted to register a new Central Board, was Dag Hagen Berg.

One can see documentation of the attempt to register a new Central Board here. The protocol that followed the digital attempt to register a new Central Board can be read here.
One sees that the following people participated in the «National Board meeting»

Steinar Bastesen
Tom Idar Wangberg
Anne Hilleren
Dag Hagen Berg
Ahmed Warsame
Kathy Fjellstad (observer)
Hanne-Sofie Hilleren (observer)

One can read from the protocol that Dag Hagen Berg participated on behalf of the Coastal Party in Oslo. I was the last person who was elected as chapter leader in Oslo. As there were not enough people interested in order to continue as chapter board, activity ceased. Who elected Dag Hagen Berg to represent Oslo is therefore a mystery. And if that is not enough, according to a screenshot from Enhetsregisteret taken on 10.01.23, Dag Hagen Berg is a part of the latest elected county board in Viken. Nevertheless, this former chief of staff for the Coastal party’s parliamentary group finds it in order to show up at an National Board meeting on behalf of the «county chapter» in the neighbouring county, participate in election a new Central Board (something that shall be done in a national convention) and send the protocol for registration at Enhetsregistreret.

Dag Hagen Berg is not an arbitrary person. He is the former chief of staff for the Coastal Party’s parliamentary group. By searching on the website Proff.no on 08.01.23, I found that Dag Hagen Berg among other things was listed as CEO for Oslo Nei til EU (the main organisation opposing Norwegian EU membership), Hålogaland Mållag (regional chapter of organisation promoting Norway’s largest minority language) and Kystalliansen (Coastal Alliance).

On March 16, 2023, an email was sent with an invitation to an extraordinary National Convention on 30.03.23. The email was sent by Kathy Fjellstad, who was elected «party leader» at the National Convention 19.12.22. After this meeting, the coup makers managed to get the new Central Board registered in Enhetsregisteret. This is the Central Board registered by November 2023:

Party leader: Kathy Fjellstad
Deputy leader: Anne Karin Gullbrå Hilleren
Board members:
Tom Idar Wangberg
Steinar Bastesen
Sigurd Annexstad Mølmann
Morten Andreas Gullbrå Hilleren
Inge Oddvar Eide
Amnon Lahigani

Unfortunately, this Central Board was registered at Enhetsregisteret. Such a registration gives the new board legitimacy towards third persons. A registration does not, however, mean that a new board is legally elected. Enhetsregisteret only conducts a check of the formalities around the information received. A reading of the protocol from the «National Convention» om 30.03.23 reveals that the meeting was as invalid as a Norwegian 25 kroner coin.

The protocol from the meeting opens as follows:

«Opening

Party leader Katty Fjellstad, leader of the Central Board elected on December 19, 2022, opened the meeting and informed about the background for the extraordinary National Convention.

1. Demand for an extraordinary National Convention from the Coastal Party in Nordland, the Coastal Party in Troms og Finnmark, the Coastal Party in Trøndelag, the Coastal Party in Trøndelag, the Coastal Party in Akershus and the Coastal Party in Oslo with reference to the statutes § 5-3. At the National Board meeting, all county chapters supported the demand for a National Convention.
2. Unanimous National Board meeting decision on December 19, 2022, where the National Conventions in 2019 and 2021 were nullified, there was elected a (temporary Central Board) and it was decided to summon to an extraordinary National Convention.
3. Unanimous Central Board decision to summon to an extraordinary National Convention om March 30, 2023, at 8. pm.

The first thing to point out here is that the demand of arranging an extraordinary National Convention was furthered by imaginary county chapters. The Coastal Party in Oslo has never supported such a demand. I wonder what «the Coastal Party in Akershus» is. Maybe it is the Coastal party in Viken? The county chapter referred to as «the Coastal Party in Trøndelag» did not have enough members in order to create a chapter board according to the statutes.

The Central Board which summonsed to an extraordinary National Convention, is the Central Board that Dag Hagen Berg tried to register in Enhetsregisteret. As explained above, this is a Central Board void of legitimacy.

It is interesting to notice who participated in this «National Convention», with the reservation that I cannot say for sure what each delegate knew about what he or she participated in. Here is what the protocol says about the participants:

«Party leader read the names of the delegates:

• Ahmed Warsame, Central Board and chapter leader Troms og Finnmark (county delegate)
• Kathy Fjellstad, Central Board, county board in Troms og Finnmark and local chapter leader in Tromsø
• Anita Huka Johannesen, Coastal Party in Lurøy (local chapter delegate)
• Steinar Bastesen, Central Board, Coastal Party in Nordland and Coastal Party in Brønnøy
• Nathalie Wangberg, Coastal Party in Trøndelag (county delegate)
• Anne K. G. Hilleren, Central Board and leader of The Coastal Party in Vestland (county delegate)
• Tom Idar Wangberg, Central Board, county leader Viken
• Anja Tyrell, county board in Viken (county delegate)
• Margrete Fjordholm, county board in Viken, observer without voting rights
• Inge Eige [misspelled for Eide], Central Board, county chapter in Troms and the local board in Senja (lost the connection after 15 min).
• Dag Berg, invited to write the protocol (without the right to vote or present proposals)

The following had announced that they could not participate.

• The Coastal party in Oslo: Sigurd A. Mølmann, as he was on a journey
• The Coastal party in Møre og Romsdal: Lars Helge S. Meidell, as he was on a military exercise
• The Coastal Party in Troms: Christine M. Annexstad (observer)

In addition, Kjetil Berland and Morten Hilleren from the Central Board informed that they could not participate, as they were on a boat without phone or Internet connection».

The coup makers used the registration in Enhetsregisteret actively. On April 19, 2023, they had taken over access to the party’s bank account. On October 7 I realized that the coup makers had taken over the party’s website. The website was now without any political or other contact, instead one was directed to the following URL: https://kystpartiet.no/www.pcvakta.no. A quick search showed that PC-vakta is a company connected to Tom Idar Wangberg.

Later, the original content at the website was restored. No news or statements about political issues have been published. But there has been published a commentary where the coup makers present their version of the internal conflicts. I will not comment upon all the allegations in this commentary, save one. The new party leadership claimed that the Central Board elected in 2021 was never registered in Enhetsregisteret or Partiregisteret. That claim is positively false, and I possess a printout from Enhetsregisteret proving that,

A last electoral campaign
Even if there was noise and little constructive activity, I was decided on conducting the electoral campaign in Oslo. We were able to elect a new chapter board and gather the necessary number of signatures. Apart from Oslo, Askøy and Lurøy were the only municipalities (or counties) where the Coastal party was on the ballot.

In some districts people delivered electoral lists without there being a local or county chapter. One example is Trøndelag, where there was no county chapter, but a list topped by Nathalie Marielle Wangberg was delivered to the county administration.

During spring 2023 I noticed a proposal for a new law on elections that would make it very difficult for the Coastal Party to participate in elections. At the party’s general assembly in Oslo in 2023 we made a proposition against the proposed new law and other examples of undemocratic legislation.

During the electoral campaign, I thought about other things than the proposed law. One of the last days before the election, I was notified that the parliament had adopted the new law. In coming elections, one would have to collect signatures from 1 % of the voters in an electoral district in order to be able to participate in national or local elections, unless one had collected 10 000 signatures in order to create a new party after the latest parliamentary election. There were no signs that the Coastal Party would collect the necessary signatures.

I found further engagement in the party meaningless, after finishing some practical tasks, I sent an email to the legitimately elected Central Boars, informing that I quit the party, and why. I had decided to finish the electoral campaign as if I were to continue. The result turned out to be a certain progress, almost a doubling of the number of votes, and the least bad result in Oslo in 18 years.

The county chapter will not gain from the progress in the election. One thing is that future activity is in the blue. Another thing is that the county chapter will not receive public funding in 2024. Due to the election result, this funding would have been doubled. As a nice greeting, the new Central Board had removed my role in Partiportalen, meaning that the Coastal Party in Oslo could not fulfil its legal duty to report its economy to Statistics Norway within 01.06.23. An email correspondence between me and Partilovnemnda shows that Kathy Fjellberg was responsible for removing my role.

One can conclude that persons who sabotage serious party-political activity are legion. In Norway, we have a lot of conditions that do not belong to a democracy – see this collection of articles in Norwegian or this background site in English.

When someone tries to do something constructive against shady elites, they are sabotaged in a variety of ways. That is why we need more people to take up the fight.