NPPW - Media release, May 8, 2017:

Re: Application to the European Court of Human Rights, ECHR

Nobel peace prize dispute reaches European Court

Who is eligible to win the Nobel peace prize? A ten years old dispute reached the European level this week when two potential recipients of the coveted prize lodged a complaint against Sweden with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The two plaintiffs had sued the Nobel Foundation for mismanagement of funds by payments to winners not within Nobel´s idea. Swedish courts rejected the case and Sweden is now accused of having failed to give a fair trial to the two plaintiffs. The two claim that Nobel intended to prevent wars by global co-operation and disarmament and that the Nobel Foundation cannot continue to let its subcommittee in Oslo hand out prizes for peace by everything else - the prize belongs to the specific “champions of peace" described more closely in Nobel´s will of 1895.  ….

      - For almost ten years we have tried to explain to the Nobel Foundation the visionary peace idea of Nobel, our demand is simply that they respect their elementary legal obligation to promote it. They have stonewalled all talk of Nobel´s intention and that is why we have now taken the case to Strasbourg, says Fredrik S. Heffermehl, a Norwegian lawyer and author. He adds that they now hope to see the European court take the matter in hand with the integrity and independence that has proved unavailable in the two Scandinavian countries. In 2012 Swedish authorities ordered the Nobel Foundation to make a study of the purpose and to exercise proper control over its Oslo-based sub-committee for the peace prize. The law requires they put force behind the order, but, according to Heffermehl, all such requests have fallen on deaf ears. His organization, the Nobel Peace Prize Watch, got a new disappointment when finally they sought the protection of the courts. Swedish law gives “those who under the bylaws may benefit from a foundation” the right to a lawsuit when foundation boards are not faithful to the purpose. The two plaintiffs have been nominated for the peace prize multiple times in later years, says Heffermehl. 

— Silence is a very powerful political tool, says Jan Oberg, Sweden and David Swanson, USA,  the two litigants, - there is little dissidents can do when their political views are ignored, but when the majority uses silence as method to defeat the peace movement´s pecuniary rights that is a grave violation of democratic principles and the rule of law. That we will not accept from the Nobel prize awarders. Nothing could demonstrate how far the prize has moved from Nobel´s idea than the fact that the military hawk, Henry Kissinger, was invited to adorn the 2016 Nobel prize celebrations, say Oberg and Swanson.

Further comment

Fredrik S. Heffermehl: +47 917 44 783, emails: fredpax[at]

Tomas Magnusson, +46 70 829 3197, emails: gosta.tomas[at]

(Jan Oberg: +46 738 5252 00, emails: TFF[at]
David Swanson: +1 202 329 7847, emails: david[at]


Original Application May 2, 2017, from Oberg/Swanson to ECHR, Strasbourg: see

The Nobel Peace Prize (Watch) shortlist for 2017, including Oberg/Swanson,

    Here is the ECHR Application 

    LIST of Documents (Docs) submitted with the ECHR Application:

    1. Book 2010, The Nobel Peace Prize - What Nobel Really Wanted, by Fredrik S. Heffermehl, pp. xiv, 21, 28, 34, 77, 78, 101 p. 1
    2. July 10, 2008, Letter Fredrik S. Heffermehl to President of Parliament, Thorbjørn Jagland (Norwegian / English)  p. 9
    3. March 21, 2012, The County Board of Stockholm Decision (Swedish / English) p. 12
    4. February 2014, Nobel Peace Prize Watch established (not attached)  p. 14
    5. January 30, 2008, Nomination with legal opinion by Prof. of law Ståle Eskeland (English) p. 16
    6. April 8, 2014, Økokrim, Norway, request for investigation (Norwegian / English)  p. 22
    7. Dec. 4, 2015, Petition for summons (Stämningsansökan) to Stockholm City Court (Swedish / English summary) p. 30
    8. Nobel Peace Prize Watch - the Shortlist 2017, finding Oberg, Swanson qualified to win (
    9. Feb. 16, 2016, DECISION (Protokoll) of Stockholms tingsrätt (Swedish) p. 43
    10. April 5, 2016, Appeal of 5, Överklagan to Svea Hovrätt (Swedish) p. 50
    11. April 19, 2016, DECISION (Protokoll) of Court of Appeal, Svea Hovrätt (Swedish) p. 63
    12. May 12, 2016, Appeal to Högsta Domstolen, Supreme Court of Sweden (Swedish) p. 67
    13. Nov 2, 2016, DECISION (Protokoll)  of the Supreme Court of Sweden /Högsta Domstolen (Swedish) p. 73-74

    The Swedish Nobel Foundation has the supreme and overall responsibility for realising the purpose and observing the law. After various attempts to have the peace prize Nobel awarders respect the intention of Nobel the Nobel Peace Prize Watch organised a lawsuit - in Dec. 2015 the NPPW, in consort with Mairead Maguire, Jan Oberg and David Swanson applied for summons in the Stockholm City Court. The claim was that the board members indemnify the Foundation (not us) for paying the prize for 2012 to the EU. «The EU clearly is not one of the champions of peace Nobel had in mind,» said Desmond Tutu and Mairead Maguire and several others in 2012. Payments that are not faithful to the purpose of the foundation lead to liability for Board members. See the full text in Swedish here and a Summary of the brief to open the case here.