Is Negligence a Subjective Evaluation?
“The accused is in this matter convicted for having with gross negligence failed to hold cabinet meetings on important administrative matters as prescribed in Article 17 of the Constitution, although he must have been clear of the danger, which loomed over the banking system and thus to state security, as specified above, with the consequence that those issues were not discussed at cabinet level”
“The conduct of the accused to fail to comply to the instructions of Article 17. in the Constitution to hold cabinet meetings on crucial policy issues, described above, was not only a breach of form, but it contributed to, that, on ministerial level no political strategy was adopted to deal with the complex problems that the accused had to be aware of in February, 2008. If such a policy had been formulated, and it followed in an orderly manner, including the Central Bank and Financial Supervisory Authority, it can be argued that it was feasible to reduce the damage left by the fall of the banks in October 2008. Furthermore, it is likely that the government had then been better prepared to evaluate the request from Glitnir bank for financial suport at the end of September 2008 such as to enable resolution to the problems of that bank in a more judicious manner than was the case. ”
“Accused, Geir Hilmar Haarde, is not rendered punishment in this case.”
National Court Judgment (IS – pdf)
The benefits from disconnecting the government (Win-win). In early 2008 insiders had ample opportunity to run with their money. No formal input was from other ministers (finance, banking etc), – thus other ministers “escaped” responsibility.
There is still no word on the reserve that went missing.
The Billion Dollar Gram (figures can be hard, 140 Northern Rock’s ?)
With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful