The Royal Sarcophagus Debacle: A Comedy in Death
Ah, Norway! Land of fjords, trolls, and now—quite fittingly—controversies even in death! In October, the architectural firm Snøhetta was summoned to craft a sarcophagus for the royal couple. I mean, why not engage in a bit of architectural razzle-dazzle when you’re building a tomb? The only catch? No open tender round. Sound fishy? It gets better.
Enter stage left, the organization Norway as a Republic. With pitchforks and fedoras at the ready, they launched a complaint to the Complaints Board for Public Procurement (KOFA). It’s like the royal family threw a party and forgot to send out invites—quite rude!
But, it gets juicier! According to reports from TV 2, the Palace cheekily replied to KOFA, asserting the contract is not illegal because, wait for it, the sarcophagus is an artistic work with a unique design. Ah yes, nothing says ‘unique’ quite like a royal tomb! Let’s hope it doesn’t come with a fake Monet to tie the room together.
The irony here is sweeter than a Swedish cinnamon bun. Craig Aaen-Stockdale, the self-proclaimed captain of the republican ship, branded the Palace’s rationale as nothing short of problematic. Slottet’s decision-making, he argues, resembles a rather lavish game of Monopoly— where the royal couple gets to use the ‘Get Out of Jail Free’ card a tad too frequently. What’s next? Cashing in on relatives for their life savings to fund a grave that looks like a five-star hotel?’
And as if the plot couldn’t thicken enough, we have the mention of Kjetil Thorsen, recently knighted for his architectural prowess, who’s got his fingers in all the royal pies, or should I say sarcophagi? “Symbolic power?” Oh, come on! That’s like saying I have the symbolic power to eat an entire birthday cake without consequences. The royal family, Aaen-Stockdale claims, is mired in “the constant mixing of public and personal.” It’s the royal family’s equivalent of wearing pajamas to a job interview—just not the best look, dear.
Meanwhile, KOFA remains the sulky teenager in the room, neither commenting nor throwing any dramatic fits, but subtly reminding the Palace they do have the authority to impose fees for illegal direct acquisitions. Call it a royal tax for bad decision-making!
So, what do we take away from this curious tale? Perhaps it’s a reminder that in the age of modernity, even in death, one can’t escape the long, watchful eye of bureaucracy and political maneuvering. And while we’re at it, do remember to check if your procurement procedures are up to snuff before commissioning the next piece of royal whimsy! Because honestly, what’s next? A golden throne for the afterlife? Now that would be a seat for the ages!
Cheers to Norway, where even the dead aren’t safe from controversy!
In October, it was officially announced that the renowned architectural firm Snøhetta had been awarded the task of designing a grand sarcophagus for the royal couple, a decision made without an open tender process that typically encourages competitive bidding among various contractors.
This decision prompted a formal complaint to the Complaints Board for Public Procurement (KOFA) from the organization Norway as a Republic, which raises concerns about transparency and fairness in public procurement practices.
Read also: Planner for the death of the king and queen: NOK 20 million for sarcophagus
On Wednesday, TV 2 reported that the Palace had responded to KOFA, asserting that the contract awarded to Snøhetta does not infringe any laws and emphasizing that the sarcophagus represents an artistic creation distinguished by its unique design.
Craig Aaen-Stockdale, the leader of Norway as a Republic, expressed concerns over the Palace’s justification, deeming it fundamentally problematic. He argued that the royal couple should finance the project using their personal resources, highlighting the potential conflict of interest stemming from the King’s recent appointment of Kjetil Thorsen to the prestigious St. Olav’s Order while simultaneously receiving significant commissions from the royal household.
“Despite widespread belief that the king wields only symbolic power, this institution remains a significant force with tangible political, economic, and social influence,” asserted Aaen-Stockdale to TV 2. He emphasized that the Royal Court, which is responsible for procuring the sarcophagus, holds considerable sway and must set a commendable example for other public institutions to follow.
Aaen-Stockdale further posited that this issue exemplifies a broader problem with the monarchy’s operations, highlighting the troubling “constant mixing of public and personal” affairs.
The Complaints Board has yet to issue a public reaction to this controversy; however, they communicated in a letter to the Palace that they retain the authority to impose penalties for unlawful direct acquisitions. In response to the criticism, Snøhetta has called upon the Castle to address these concerns, while the Castle has chosen to refer back to its earlier answer provided to KOFA.
RESTING PLACE: Here the royal couple will rest in the mausoleum under the castle church at Akershus. Photo: Terje Bendiksby (NTB)
**Interview: Navigating the Royal Sarcophagus Controversy**
*Host:* Welcome, everyone, to today’s segment of “In Depth,” where we explore some of the more interesting news stories of the week. Today, we’re thrilled to have Craig Aaen-Stockdale, the leader of the organization Norway as a Republic, join us to discuss the recent controversy surrounding the royal sarcophagus design. Craig, thank you for being here.
*Craig Aaen-Stockdale:* Thank you for having me!
*Host:* Let’s dive right in. The decision to award the architectural firm Snøhetta the contract for the royal sarcophagus without an open tender process seems to have stirred quite the debate. Can you explain why this is an issue for you and your organization?
*Craig:* Absolutely. The lack of an open tender process raises significant concerns about transparency. When public money is involved—even in something as final as a royal tomb—there should be a fair and competitive bidding process. We believe that every Norwegian should have a say in how their tax money is spent, especially on projects that could be seen as extravagant.
*Host:* It sounds like you feel the decision wasn’t just about the sarcophagus but really highlights broader issues in how governance is conducted?
*Craig:* Exactly! It’s about accountability and ensuring that decisions made by the Palace don’t resemble a lavish Monopoly game, where they get to play by different rules. It’s essential for the health of our democracy to keep the monarchy in check, even after they’ve passed.
*Host:* The Palace responded to the Complaints Board, stating that they believe this sarcophagus is an “artistic work with a unique design.” What’s your take on that?
*Craig:* It’s a fascinating argument! But claiming it’s ‘artistic’ doesn’t exempt them from procurement regulations. If they really want a “unique design,” they should still open up the competition. Otherwise, it seems like they think they can get away with anything, reminiscent of wearing pajamas to a job interview—the optics aren’t great!
*Host:* You mentioned that KOFA appears disinterested in engaging deeply with this situation. How do you think they should act?
*Craig:* KOFA needs to remember its authority in ensuring fair procurement. They shouldn’t shy away from imposing penalties if necessary. This situation certainly serves as a reminder that even in matters of state, decisions must be transparent and lawful.
*Host:* So what’s next for Norway as a Republic? Do you think there will be more action taken?
*Craig:* We will continue to voice our concerns and advocate for greater scrutiny. The public deserves to be part of these discussions, especially when it comes to such high-profile expenditures. I believe this is just the start; we won’t let this issue fade quietly into the background.
*Host:* Thank you, Craig, for sharing your insights on this peculiar yet fascinating incident surrounding the Norwegian royal sarcophagus. It seems like there’s much more to come!
*Craig:* Thank you for having me!
*Host:* And that concludes our discussion on the Royal Sarcophagus Debacle. Stay tuned for more updates on this evolving story and other intriguing news in Norway.