NORWAY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Kai-Ståle Kristiansen, Pål Lieungh and Hedvig Moe, Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS
ity and transparency in defence procurement. Key changes include stricter requirements for climate and environmental considerations – now assessed from a life-cycle perspective – enhanced controls over the supply chain, increased documentation and openness requirements throughout the procurement process, and specific ethical self-declaration obligations for suppliers and subcontractors above the EEA thresh - old value. What makes this regulatory landscape particularly challenging to navigate is that the legal basis for any given defence procurement is rarely determined by a single instrument alone. The starting point is the Public Procurement Act (LOA) with FOA, but procurements in the defence and security domain may alternatively fall under FOSA. Where the contracting authority con - siders that essential security interests are at stake, it may invoke the exemption under Article 123 of the EEA Agreement, exempting the procurement from the statutory procurement framework (LOA and FOA/ FOSA) in its entirety. The procurement will, however, still be governed by RAF Part III, which imposes a procedural framework with more flexible procedures. Where classified information or security-sensitive assets are involved, the Security Act ( sikkerhetsloven ) adds requirements for facility and personnel security clearance. Export control rules apply in addition to this for any transaction involving cross-border transfer of defence materiel, technology or services. The consequence is that a single procurement may engage four or five distinct regulatory regimes admin - istered by different authorities – including the Nor - wegian Defence Materiel Agency ( Forsvarsmateriell (FMA)) for the procurement, the National Security Authority ( Nasjonal sikkerhetsmyndighet (NSM)) and the relevant clearance authorities for security clear - ance and supervision under the Security Act and ordinary courts or the public procurement complaints board ( Klagenemnda for offentlige anskaffelser (KOFA)) for review of the procurement procedure. For estab - lished defence suppliers this is familiar terrain. For new entrants – whether civilian technology compa - nies, foreign system suppliers or financial investors – the regulatory complexity would seem to constitute a material barrier to entry. The Defence Pledge acknowl -
edges this, noting that businesses not already actively engaged with the defence sector will need support to prepare for such cooperation, including security cul - ture, cleared personnel and adapted physical infra - structure. Key changes implemented through RAF 2026 The procurement regulations were revised and renamed RAF with effect from 1 January 2026, explic - itly reflecting the altered security environment and the need for a higher procurement tempo. RAF’s scope has been clarified: Part I applies to all defence sector acquisitions, Part II to procurements above the EEA threshold, and Part III to procurements that may be exempted under Article 123 or Article 36. The thresh - old under Section 2 of the Public Procurement Act was amended to NOK500,000 with effect from 1 July 2026. Ethics rules have been tightened. A two-year rule requires particular caution towards suppliers that have engaged personnel who were employed in the defence sector within the preceding two years. In practice, such suppliers may not act directly towards the defence sector in a procurement process with - out dispensation from the Ministry of Defence (high threshold). Sustainability requirements have been incorporated, with climate and environmental con - siderations weighted at a minimum of 30% in award criteria as a general rule, subject to exceptions where the procurement has an insignificant climate footprint, imposes disproportionate costs or undermines opera - tional capability or preparedness. The Article 123 exemption in practice The boundary between the ordinary procurement regime and the Article 123 exemption is turning out to be one of the most consequential legal questions in Norwegian defence procurement. Article 123 permits a state to take the measures that it considers neces - sary to safeguard essential security interests connect - ed to the production of or trade in arms, ammunition and war materiel. In practice, this grants the defence sector access to more flexible procedures: directed requests, direct awards and requirements for indus - trial co-operation. The exemption must be invoked on a case-by-case basis and documented in the pro - curement protocol. Suppliers may have the defence
156 D EFENCE CON TRACTS 2 026
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook