Skip to content
STEMMEN FRA INNSIDENTHE VOICE FROM INSIDE
Norsk
STEMMEN FRA INNSIDENPrivate working version
Local tools and prototypes. Real submissions and payments are not open.

inmAIte

From a pile of documents
to an organised case.

Check your documents, keep track of dates and prepare a draft you can review yourself.

Private prototype for preparing complaints and tracking deadlines. The case record stays in this tab. PDF and image extraction sends the file to a local helper process on your own machine, if you have started it. No text is sent to an AI service or added to Rettsspeil’s aggregate statistics. Use synthetic documents or documents cleared for testing.

The text review uses fixed search rules. It provides questions to check and source references, not a measured probability of a legal breach. No deadline is calculated automatically. Save your work before closing or reloading the page.

Both workflows stay in this browser tab. They do not transfer information to each other: enter any material you want to use in the complaint yourself. The case work file does not include the complaint form; download its draft separately before leaving or reloading.

1

Choose or create a case

Resume from a private working copy

Open a password-protected .sfi work copy or an existing unencrypted JSON work file. Decryption and validation happen locally. A forgotten password cannot be recovered. A structured case report is not a resumable work file.

Nothing is replaced until the entire file and the original files’ checksums have been checked. A valid import can still contain inaccurate claims or a self-review you have not performed. Review the contents before using them.

Switching cases must never mix documents or drafts from two cases. This is local separation, not an account service for multiple clients.

A FICTIONAL EXAMPLE

Help from outside can begin with a conversation

A person in an isolation cell calls a friend using a fixed institutional telephone. Together they discuss how the friend can help.

AI-generated illustration. The screen does not show the actual complaint tool. Choose play to watch the sequence.
  1. 01 · The conversationThe person inside explains what happened and the help they want.
  2. 02 · PreparationThe friend outside checks the required authorization and prepares a complaint draft and relevant attachments.
  3. 03 · The emailThe friend checks the recipient, authorization and documents before sending the complaint from their own email account.

To: Bergen prison

Subject: Complaint

Attachment: Completed complaint

Press “Send” in the example

✓ Sent — this is a fictional illustration.

This is only an example. This website does not send an email here. Check what authorization and documentation are required, verify the recipient and send it yourself.

Draft an appeal and organise the decision text. The review uses fixed search rules to find excerpts, dates and section references. It does not decide whether the decision is lawful or whether your appeal will succeed.

Text you paste or open from a text file is processed only in this tab. Case content is not sent to the blog, a translation provider or an AI service. Save your draft before closing the page or switching languages.

Have a structured model report covering several decisions? Check the analyses in the analysis workshop. You can check quotations, rule versions and model results before further use. This complaint form does not run an AI model automatically.

Choose the subject and review route

Choose the authority or oversight body. The tool helps organise text and draft a complaint; it does not determine the correct legal route. Check the decision and appeal instructions. A request to the Supervisory Council or Parliamentary Ombud does not replace an ordinary appeal or preserve its deadline.

1. Review the decision

Paste the complete decision including appeal instructions, or choose a .txt file. For a PDF, copy its text and paste it here.

2. Decision and deadline

Appeal deadlines vary. Some correctional cases have very short deadlines, such as 48 hours. Check the decision and the applicable rule; this tool does not calculate a deadline from the notification date. Deadline status only compares your entered date with today’s date in Europe/Oslo.

3. What do you want to appeal?

State specifically what you request, such as reversal, reconsideration or a changed condition.

For example: allegations you could not comment on, or documents that were not considered. Include only statements you can support.

For oversight requests, describe the ordinary appeal routes you have used, the responses received or why you have not received a response. Identify relevant attachments.

Explain which point each attachment supports. Attachments are not uploaded here.

An appeal normally does not automatically stop implementation. A request under forvaltningsloven § 42 or the applicable special provision must be addressed to the competent authority separately. This checkbox is unavailable for oversight requests.

4. Create an appeal draft

A short appeal must identify the decision and the change you seek. Ask for time to supplement the grounds if needed. This tool does not guarantee that a deadline is preserved. Check the requirements, recipient and deadline, submit the appeal yourself and keep the receipt. An oversight request is a separate route; requesting more time does not automatically extend a deadline.

Before submitting

  1. Complete the placeholders, identify the decision and the change you request. Check that all factual statements are accurate.
  2. Check the deadline and recipient in the appeal instructions. For an ordinary appeal, follow the decision’s appeal instructions. For an oversight request, check the selected body’s mandate, requirements and deadline.
  3. Sign or use accepted electronic authentication, submit through an appropriate channel and keep the receipt. This website does not submit the appeal.

Sources checked 26 October 2026: forvaltningsloven § 32, § 42, straffegjennomføringsloven § 7.

Get the documents and establish when you received them

The access templates cover your own cases across prisons, regions, KDI, systems and archives. A separate Infoflyt template is also available. Request delivery through a secure channel; ask for paper if needed.

All access templatesPDFWordDownload receipt and delivery supplement

If a letter was delivered late, distinguish the decision date, dispatch, arrival at the prison, notification to you or your representative and physical handover. Request retained records and receipts. A new access request does not stop an appeal deadline; submit any appeal in time using the material you have and explain which documents are missing.

Guidance and sources for the different review routes
  • Correctional Service: Read the instructions in the specific decision. Some deadlines are very short. Appeal information.
  • Child welfare: Distinguish an administrative decision, a concern about a service and a board or court ruling. An appeal against a child welfare service decision is normally submitted first to the decision-making authority. Board and court decisions require a different assessment. County Governor guidance.
  • NAV: Identify the scheme concerned. Municipal social services and state benefits may have different appeal bodies. NAV appeal rights.
  • County Governor: Establish whether the letter is a first decision, an appeal decision or a supervisory opinion. Do not assume that a final appeal decision carries a further ordinary appeal right.
  • Supervisory Council: A request concerns the Council’s oversight remit. It does not replace an ordinary appeal. Council responsibilities.
  • Parliamentary Ombud: Normally use ordinary administrative appeals first. The Ombud’s guidance states one year from the final decision and gives separate advice on missing replies, reminders and powers of attorney. Check the conditions for your case. How to complain.

Review-route guidance checked on 1 November 2026. This site does not determine the correct legal procedure or calculate deadlines for you. The tool performs local excerpt searches, not an AI assessment of lawfulness. Official linked sources are mainly in Norwegian.

Read chapter 11 · Prisoners for reuse