Violations of Constitutional Guarantees: Cybercrime, Extortion, Hate Speech, and the Failure to Ensure Accountability

Western Norway July 2026

Last updated: 01.08.2026

How did a seat on the Fredrikstad City Council become a launchpad for cybercrime, data breaches, blackmail, and ethnic and religious incitement all while shielded by the direct patronage and institutional immunity of the Fredrikstad Police?

The Values and Ethical Principles That Define These Norwegian Institutions

In Norwegian political culture, the Socialist Left Party (SV) is widely recognized as one of the strongest advocates for human rights, the fight against racism, the protection of minorities, and social equality. Therefore, the emergence of a candidate from this established party whose conduct stands in direct contradiction to these principles represents a serious blow to its political and ethical credibility.

The Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret) represents the highest local political authority responsible for managing public affairs and municipal resources with integrity. Its members are bound by a strict Code of Ethics (Etiske retningslinjer), which requires an unwavering commitment to four fundamental pillars: safeguarding public trust, combating racial and religious discrimination, preventing abuse of power and conflicts of interest, and prohibiting intimidation and harassment (Trakassering).

Any regression by a political actor into hate speech or digital blackmail does not merely constitute a violation of criminal law; it represents a fundamental collapse of that individual's representative legitimacy and a blatant breach of the ethical principles upon which the municipality was established principles intended to protect the dignity of its citizens and preserve civil peace.

Dialogforum Østfold is established as a platform for interfaith dialogue and multicultural engagement, with the aim of strengthening community, tolerance, and mutual respect among different religious and social groups. The forum’s core values are founded on dialogue, mutual understanding, and cooperation across religious and cultural boundaries.

As an organization operating within the field of interfaith dialogue and social cooperation, this role carries a responsibility to promote:

• Combating racism, hate speech, and discrimination by upholding human dignity, respect, and equality for all individuals.

• Promoting integration and dialogue between different religious and social communities, while contributing to the development of mutual trust and understanding.

• Demonstrating moral and social responsibility, with representatives and members expected to uphold the values of tolerance, respect, and accountability both in public and private contexts.

The Scandalous Paradox of Three Pillars Betrayed by Misuse

The most shocking paradox is that this candidate holds membership in these three institutions and is active on their platforms simultaneously, while in practice doing the exact opposite of what these bodies were established to defend:

• The Dialogue Forum (Dialogforum):
  Established to build bridges between communities, promote dialogue, and reject hatred and discrimination.

• The Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret):
  Governed by strict ethical standards and a responsibility to protect the dignity and trust of its citizens.

• The Socialist Left Party (SV):
  Whose declared mission is to combat racism and defend human rights.

The presence of a candidate who engages in blackmail and intimidation, who expresses blatant racial contempt ("Gypsies, thieves, rootless"), and who attacks religious communities, while holding a role within this dialogue forum, serving as an elected representative on the Fredrikstad Municipal Council, and representing the long-established SV party, constitutes a profound and alarming contradiction between his conduct and the very principles these institutions were established to uphold.

Such conduct represents a disturbing exploitation of values of tolerance and ethical responsibility, turning principles intended to protect dignity and social trust into tools that can be misused to conceal harmful actions and digital abuses.

After the Mask Fell: The Documented Return of Extortion, Hate Crimes, and Digital Crime Involving a Deputy Member of Fredrikstad City Council

It was not merely a slip of the tongue, nor a momentary mistake made behind the screen of a social media account on the X platform in a moment of anger. Rather, the evidence points to a systematic digital intimidation campaign, documented through more than 120 posts and statements containing of defamation, blackmail, threats, and sexual, racial, sectarian, and religious degradation.

In the conduct and public discourse of the (SV) party candidate, democratic principles appeared to be reduced to nothing more than a mask a fragile cover concealing a pattern of alleged misconduct, including defamation, manipulation, and actions that caused harm and distress to individuals.

This cover was shattered during the first investigative confrontation, exposing what can be described as a pattern of "cross-border bullying." As his ability to withstand independent journalistic scrutiny weakened, he resorted to increasingly aggressive methods of defence, methods incompatible with the ethical standards expected in public life.

The dignity of families did not escape this pattern of hostility, nor did the sanctity of the deceased, as statements were directed toward individuals and their relatives in ways that crossed lines of respect and human dignity. Innocent third parties were also drawn into conflicts in which they had no involvement, with threats targeting their reputation and privacy, alongside the use of digital surveillance methods and account intrusion.

All of this occurred amid what has been described as a lack of effective institutional response, leaving behind statements filled with primitive street language that reduces human beings to their origin, family background, sectarian identity, and personal honour.

Among this extensive collection of more than 120 documented statements, we present examples that speak for themselves statements published publicly by the candidate himself before public opinion.

The First Post (Exporting the Poisons of Sectarian and Tribal Contempt):

"The Ameli clan of Jabal Amel are a group of [insulting term] gypsies from India to Iran to Lebanon, a bunch of thieves who lived in the mountain because no one wanted them to live near them, and then they were named after this mountain because they had no clan or religion. Then they went to Najaf because there was good money in studying religion, and they are all [insulting term]."

Documents of Dishonor: Selected Statements from a Documented Record of Digital Abuse, Threats, Defamation, and Hate Speech

Among more than 120 public statements collected from the candidate’s public accounts a candidate who serves as a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council, a member of Dialogforum Østfold, and a representative of the Socialist Left Party (SV) are statements ranging from blackmail, threats, cyber-piracy, and sexual harassment targeting individuals and families, to blatant ethnic and sectarian degradation. We present this publicly available post as a documented example. This post reflects the nature of a continuing pattern of conduct that has notably received questionable protection and administrative facilitation from local police elements, providing him with a shield against accountability:

The text of the post as publicly broadcast on the X platform:

"Jabal Amel, or the mountain of shit, a bunch of thieving gypsies and scumbags from India to Iran to Lebanon. They settled in the mountain because no one likes to live near them, and were named after this mountain because they have no tribe or religion. Then they went to Najaf because there is good money in studying religion, and they are all crooks and losers."

In this post, the candidate who continues to hold membership in the Fredrikstad Municipal Council, the (SV) party, and Dialogforum Østfold explicitly targets the Amili community and clans with connections to Iraq and Lebanon through severe hate speech. He turns his political position into a platform for spreading cross-border hostility and vilification under the attention of local authorities.

The Second Post (Hollow Racial Narcissism to Intimidate Opponents):

"Hey Ba'arour, you louse... you fart-maker, look at my great-grandfather Sahl bin Saad Al-Sa'idi, the authentic Arab who lived during the time of the Prophet and Hussein. You are of unknown origin, and if you had an origin they would not have named you after a mountain. Gypsies who came from India, then to Iran, then to Lebanon, and then to Najaf. While we are from Mecca to Medina to great Iraq."

From the perspective of Forensic Linguistics and Sociopolitical Analysis, this public comment published via the handle of the candidate, a deputy municipal council member, and a representative in the Dialogue Forum (Dialogforum) for the Socialist Left Party (SV) serves as definitive evidence of systemic hate speech.

The text can be deconstructed into the following critical dimensions:

The Legal & Forensic Dimension (Hate Speech and Discrimination)

From a legal standpoint, and specifically in reference to Section 185 of the Norwegian Penal Code (Straffeloven § 185) concerning hate speech, this text falls squarely within criminal thresholds for several reasons:

• Ethnic Vilification Based on National Origin: Utilizing the term "gypsies" as a derogatory tool for ethnic denial, and systematically stripping an entire population of their geographic and national identity by fabricating an migratory trajectory of displacement ("from India to Iran to Lebanon to Najaf"), is a textbook attempt to dehumanize individuals based on their perceived lineage.

• Incitement to Group Hatred: The text does not merely assault an individual in a private dispute; rather, it broadens into an attack on entire social, cultural, and geographic hubs (Jabal Amel and Najaf). This elevates the conduct from personal defamation to public, collective incitement against specific ethnic and sectarian demographics.

The Psycho-Social Dimension (Ethnocentrism and Tribal Narcissism)

The text exposes a deeply rooted cognitive framework of Ethnocentrism and primitive social tribalism:

• The Hierarchy of Ancestry and Lineage: The writer relies on a defensive mechanism of "ancestral supremacy," weaponizing historical associations ("my great grandfather Sahal bin Saad Al-Saadi", and linking himself to Mecca, Medina, and Great Iraq) as a tool to establish biological and human superiority over the victim, who is labeled as having "unknown origins."

• Direct Contradiction with Socialist Ideology: This rhetoric represents an absolute moral and ideological betrayal. While the writer represents a Norwegian leftist party (SV) whose foundational platform fights against classism, racism, and ethnocentrism, the comment proves that the writer harbors a rigid, tribal consciousness that evaluates human worth based on family trees and geography, rather than citizenship and human dignity.

The Institutional & Political Dimension (Breach of Public Trust)

Given his role as a member of the official Dialogue Forum (Dialogforum Østfold), whose core mandate is to counter hate speech and promote social cohesion:

• Undermining Social Order: The resort to street-level, vulgar profanity (" بعرور قملة / louse-ridden dropping", "يالضارطي / you flatulent one") by a public dialogue official marks a severe degradation of public discourse. It provides objective proof of his utter disqualification from facilitating community integration or social dialogue.

• The Illusion of Immunity: Broadcasting such severe, documented racism openly on a global platform like (X) reflects a dangerous sense of impunity. It demonstrates that the council member operates under the assumption that his connections or procedural links with certain local police elements shield him from the legal and political consequences of his actions.

Article 185 Under the Microscope of Complicity: Who Grants the Candidate Immunity?

Before these lines loaded with primitive racism, Norwegian law stands firmly against them; Article 185 of the Norwegian Penal Code (Straffeloven § 185), which concerns "hate speech and discrimination," clearly criminalizes any public statement that contains an insult (forhåne) or promotes contempt and degradation (ringeakt) against any individual or group based on their race, national origin, religion, or beliefs, with penalties reaching up to 3 years of imprisonment.

Since the perpetrator here is a political candidate, Article 77 (paragraph j) requires the punishment to be aggravated to the maximum extent due to a breach of special trust and the shock caused to society (brudd på en særlig tillit).

However, the greatest shock and the blatant flaw do not lie in his personal conduct, but rather in the strange security umbrella that was secretly woven around him to exempt him from punishment by parties within the police apparatus!

Linda Tengesdal’s Leap Over the Law: When Hate Speech Becomes "Mere Linguistic Analysis

Here, the true face of administrative and legal negligence within the Eastern Police District (Fredrikstad politidistrikt ) emerges. In the decision issued on 01 July 2026 under case number 17229053, the police prosecutor and legal counsel "Linda Tengesdal" (Linda Tengesdal) coldly bypassed the provisions of the law in order to close the case under the justification of the absence of "sufficient reason to initiate an investigation" pursuant to Section 224 of the Criminal Procedure Act!

In her reply memorandum dated 2 July 2026, Tengesdal justified her disregard for the blatant evidence by stating:

"It is difficult to follow up on the victim's report... much of the content appears to be merely personal linguistic analyses! The content is also not of a nature that would constitute threats punishable by law!"

How did the eye of the law, through prosecutor Tengesdal, fail to see clear statements that insulted honor and accused an entire sect of theft, inferiority, and ignorance? How did explicit hate speech criminalized under Article 185 become merely "personal linguistic analyses" in the mind of the police prosecutor?!

The matter did not stop there; rather, the documents revealed a suspicious security loophole inside the Fredrikstad Police Station. When the journalist proved that the candidate had hacked his accounts, as the accused himself had admitted, Tengesdal defended him coldly, stating:

"The accused was granted access to the case file (Saksinnsyn), and personally attended Fredrikstad Police Station on 1 July 2026 to read the file, and from there he became aware of the speech!"

This admission proves that the police apparatus itself provided the accused with rapid facilitation; while the journalist was under the pressure of digital threats and blackmail, the police corridors were opened for the alleged blackmailer to access the victim's files and security-related actions, before he fled again to continue his threats!

21 June (Unanimous Removal of the Candidate and Digital Retaliation):

Following a wave of public dissatisfaction, the individual concerned was unanimously removed from his political party and the municipal council. According to the documented timeline, the expelled candidate turned to his digital platforms and allegedly boasted about hacking accounts belonging to the journalist, gaining access to his official communications with the municipality, and targeting accounts belonging to family members and other innocent individuals whom he mistakenly believed were connected to the journalist.

He then launched a public intimidation campaign, threatening to expose and discredit those individuals and to publish images of them and their children, in an apparent attempt to silence the journalist and prevent him from continuing his journalistic work. Screenshots preserved from his own accounts document, according to the available material, both the threats and statements relating to hacking and extortion.

01 July (Decision Not to Open an Investigation):

According to official documents, Police Prosecutor Linda Tengesdal decided not to open an investigation from the outset and dismissed the case despite allegations involving hacking, extortion, and racist statements. The decision was justified on the basis that there was insufficient grounds to initiate an investigation. In her assessment, she further stated that a substantial part of the complaint amounted to “linguistic analyses” and that the reported conduct, in her view, did not reach the threshold of a criminal offence.

The Role Behind the Scenes:

According to the documented account, this procedural course unfolded in direct cooperation with a specific police officer. The same officer is the subject of an audio recording held by the journalist, dated 14 January 2026, which, according to the journalist, documents attempts to pressure and improperly influence him into silence and to prevent him from exercising his journalistic rights, including through unsupported allegations aimed at undermining his credibility.

Based on the documents and the sequence of events, this officer also handled informal discussions with the suspect aimed at resolving his situation with the municipality.

According to the documented timeline and official records, the criminal case was dismissed, and no further criminal proceedings followed at the local police level. The expelled candidate subsequently retained his position within the party and municipal council. When asked for comment, the municipality declined to provide further clarification, only confirming that the individual remained registered as a member. The decisions, correspondence, and official records form the basis of this investigation into the sequence of events and their implications.

A Dismissed Candidate’s Desperate Deception: Exploiting the Name of the Judiciary as a Cover for a Transnational Criminal Record

The repeated attempts by the expelled candidate to mislead the members of the Municipal Council and the public by claiming he is a victim of "injustice" and that he is "recoursing to the police and the judiciary" following the stripping away of his final fig leaf and the exposure of his violations through material evidence are nothing short of a forced continuation of fraudulent practice. It constitutes a textbook manifestation of what criminological science and forensic psychology term "doubling down" and a desperate "forward-flight mechanism." When an offender's defensive structures crumble, admission is systematically rejected; instead, deception is escalated and manufactured victimhood is deployed, precisely because fraud remains the sole currency in his possession to delay inevitable reckoning.

This operational model directly mirrors the behavior of notorious fraudsters throughout history such as Bernard Madoff and Frank Abagnale who relied on invented credentials, fabricated titles, postures of victimhood, and pro forma threats of legal action as a glass facade to mask their crimes and mislead their surroundings until the moment of ultimate judicial collapse.

This deceptive conduct, calculated solely to divert attention from his abuse of municipal office to gag free speech and engage in direct espionage on official and private correspondence between citizens and the municipality conduct he confirmed through his own documented admissions following the unanimous vote for his expulsion on June 21, 2026 is nothing short of a replication of a prior scenario within the same network; where his partner’s cohabitation with a police officer facilitated the suppression of a case involving the trafficking of dozens of migrants, blocking it from reaching the courts through direct support and coverage from within the Oslo Police District. Today, the exact same script is being re enacted through compromised elements in the Fredrikstad Police Department an alarming indicator of how personal relationships and influence within certain security circles appear to supersede the rule of law and obstruct justice.

Judicial institutions and the rule of law always stand as an inherent adversary and deterrent against criminals and human traffickers, never providing a protective shield for extortionists. The suspect’s actions do not rely on the justice system, but rather constitute a misleading exploitation of the judiciary's name and authority, drawing strength from temporary administrative protection and office-level case dismissals engineered by corrupt elements within the Fredrikstad Police Department. These decisions themselves are now the subject of official investigations concerning gross negligence, complicity, and abuse of authority.

This maneuver merely reproduces a pattern previously dismantled by the courts. In 2016, following his definitive legal defeat in the fabricated "attempted murder" lawsuit orchestrated alongside his wife wherein his daughter was also utilized as a perjured witness he immediately sought to circumvent the binding ruling and suppress the truth. This is the same family unit he now subsumes under the banner of "myself and my family facing injustice and defamation," despite documented complicity in manufacturing evidence. However, courts are strictly governed by material evidence and binding rulings, and will not serve as a shield for anyone who has lost all moral and legal credibility.

The documented criminal record of this individual deprives him and his claims of any legal or ethical credibility:

• A Transnational Criminal Record: Irrefutable documentation establishes his direct involvement in international human trafficking networks and illegal border-crossing operations, the forgery of official documents and his date of birth to run for elections under false pretenses, alongside documented cases of public fund embezzlement, forgery, severe malicious reporting targeting those in his social surroundings, perjury, and the circumvention of a binding judicial ruling dated March 19, 2026. This ruling subsequently triggered the unanimous decision for his expulsion on June 21, 2026, in accordance with his own admissions, prior to his reinstatement to office through a suspicious deal engineered with the intervention of compromised police elements. However, the most critical aspect extends to the protective umbrella that shielded him from justice by stalling prosecution and blocking cases from reaching the courts an implicit complicity that strips these influential figures of their law-enforcement mandate, reducing official authority to a mere cover for blatant criminal practices.

• Felonies Not Invalidated by Malicious Reports: Hundreds of documents and explicit confessions confirm the commission of cybercrimes, digital extortion, hacking, and systematic hate speech material evidence whose criminal impact cannot be erased by claiming "harm and defamation" or through pro-forma legal filings. Justice grants no immunity to blackmailers, and exploiting the name of the courts will not turn perpetrators into victims. This is particularly true following the official referral of this file documented with digital evidence and trace records of hacking to international bodies specializing in combating cybercrime and organized crime, placing his name and digital footprint under monitoring within cross-border security databases.

• Judicial Precedent and Circumvention of Rulings: The falsehood of his narrative of "victimhood" is laid bare by a decisive precedent: He and his partner previously employed the exact same tactic by playing the role of the "aggrieved party" before the justice system, until the Gulating Court of Appeal (Gulating lagmannsrett) issued its ruling on March 19 dismissing the lawsuit and thoroughly dismantling their misleading claims. Instead of complying with justice, the suspect exploited his position as a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council to circumvent the binding judicial decision and suppress the truth, in a desperate attempt to re-manufacture a narrative that the judiciary had already settled and struck down.

• A Fake Facade and Fabricated Claims: Promoting false narratives regarding the ownership of assets, wealth, project management, and fictitious travels a fraudulent practice grounded in deceit and systematic misdirection, alongside the invention of the title "engineer" with zero professional or field record. This is the exact same deceitful method employed by his partner prior to the full exposure of her fabrications. These assertions are made in a desperate bid to cover up a bankrupt financial reality and a blatant criminal record, substantiated by material evidence and witnesses.

An objective assessment of these violations reveals a stark institutional truth: Had these documented crimes been committed in any other country where the law is strictly enforced and justice is respected without favoritism or conflict of interest, this individual would currently be serving a prison sentence. Systematic extortion, unauthorized account breaches, human trafficking, electoral fraud, and ongoing harm directed against individuals and their families constitute offenses that warrant immediate incarceration under all international legal standards. The delay in holding him accountable is merely a stark testament to this network's success in exploiting systemic loopholes through the complicity of influential actorsmaking the fight against this influence an arduous and ongoing test for the credibility of oversight bodies.

"An official correspondence from Fredrikstad Municipality confirms that Salah Hassan Al-Saadi remains a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret) for the 2023–2027 term, and also serves as a deputy member of both the Health Committee (Helseutvalget) and the Planning Committee (Planutvalget). The municipality confirms that this status remains valid as of today."

Hello!
We can confirm that Salah Hassan Al-Saadi was elected as a deputy member of the Fredrikstad Municipal Council (Bystyret) for the period 2023–2027.
He is also a deputy member of the Health Committee (Helseutvalget) and the Planning Committee (Planutvalget).
This status remains valid today.
Furthermore, we have no further comments regarding this matter.

Kind regards,
Atle Kjøge Jansson
Communications Advisor
Fredrikstad Municipality

Preserving Integrity and Protecting Society: Journalism Will Not Submit to Bargaining

This succession of security decisions raises profound questions for the people of Fredrikstad, its citizens, and its voters: How can the Fredrikstad police - Eastern Police District grant unwritten immunity to an individual who openly spews some of the most degrading forms of sectarian racism and racial contempt? Has Section 185 of the Penal Code become a dead letter, frozen and filed away under the pretext of “linguistic analysis” when it concerns a person benefiting from highly questionable institutional complicity?

Fredrikstad Municipality, as a public institution governed by the core values of integrity and responsibility, must never become a shield behind which those who weaponize street language to blackmail others and destroy reputations can hide. Exposing the blatant legal complicity of the Fredrikstad Police - Eastern Police District, its police prosecutor Linda Tengesdal, and the officer acting in collusion with her, is not merely a defense of a single victim. It is an imperative step toward purging the public sphere and safeguarding the integrity of public service and municipal institutions from the poison of blackmail and verbal intimidation.

Throughout life, an individual repeatedly stands before defining trials that do not merely test their endurance, but unveil the true substance of their principles. One may cross paths with architects of blackmail, practitioners of deception, and a third faction that views the law merely as an instrument to be wielded when it serves their interests and disabled when it restricts their desires. In such decisive moments, humanity divides: those who surrender to fear and forfeit their freedom, and those who make steadfastness their fortress and truth their weapon, causing conspiracies to shatter against the rock of their patience and conviction.

As for me, the heavy mandate of intellectual autonomy and an uncompromising commitment to truth has thrust me into the heart of an existential confrontation with intricate networks of influence. This journey has demanded intense legal and ethical battles where my adversary was not merely organized crime in its conventional form, but a systematic moral decay within parts of the police apparatus, where authority was weaponized in pursuit of sinister interests.

The most agonizing dimension of this ordeal has been facing a relentless campaign of institutional blackmail, disguised beneath the authority of official bodies originally established to stand as bastions of integrity, trust, and professional honor. Instead, they inverted their purpose, executing malicious, retaliatory recommendations and coercive measures designed to crush the will and subjugate independent thought. Yet, despite the severity of the siege, those fabricated accusations collapsed before the essence of justice; for the law when liberated from political interference and allowed to operate independently remains the ultimate truth that exposes deception and restores rights to their rightful owners.

Ignoring a blackmailer may, in certain contexts, represent a dignified refusal that denies him the legitimacy and attention he craves. However, the issue transcends personal grievances when bargaining degrades into an institutionalized practice by the very authorities entrusted with enforcing the law.

Certain elements within the police department reached the absolute nadir of audacity, attempting a wretched transaction: offering to facilitate my personal and administrative affairs in exchange for selling my pen and abandoning the moral virtue of the free word. These were not passing suggestions; they are indisputable facts, permanently preserved and documented in live audio recordings.

To refuse submission at such critical junctures is not a mere professional choice; it is an ethical and existential duty. Resisting this coordinated institutional overreach is the final defense of truth itself, protecting society from drowning in an ocean of institutionalized deception and the systematic distortion of public consciousness.

At this point, the discourse is no longer about a personal dispute, but a matter of vital public concern touching the very foundation of the rule of law. Public trust in institutions is not preserved through slogans, but through transparency, accountability, and absolute equality before the law. The exploitation of any public office to suppress freedom of expression or intimidate journalistic work does not harm individuals alone; it threatens the fundamental trust upon which the entire social contract is built.

Throughout this journey, I have faced flagrant violations of my rights and aggressive assaults on the independence of my position. Every form of cheap bargaining has been resolutely rejected. Journalism, in its truest essence, is not a profession managed through the logic of transactions; it is a sacred mission founded on independence, integrity, and an absolute commitment to facts. Therefore, I stand today firmly holding my right to present reality exactly as it is unbending in the face of intimidation, and demanding accountability wherever its grounds exist. I remain unshakably convinced that a word anchored in evidence is more powerful than any network of influence, and that the truth no matter how long it is concealed or how deeply the complicit attempt to bury it will ultimately force its way into the light.