日本語
한국어
Polski
Deutsch
Nederlands
Español
Français
Português
Italiano
Svenska
繁體中文
Dansk
// DOSSIER — norway-parliamentary-probe-senior-officials-jeffrey-epstein-links
Norway Launches Parliamentary Probe Into 11 Senior Officials Over Jeffrey Epstein Links
REL_TIME: 04 Oct 2026 17:12Z · LANG: EN
Norway's Parliament has initiated public hearings investigating 11 current and former high-ranking ministers, including Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere, over connections and financial grants linked to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Triggered by the U.S. Department of Justice's January 2026 release of millions of Epstein-related documents, the probe focuses on over 130 million kroner ($13.5 million) in Foreign Ministry funding allocated to the International Peace Institute (IPI) between 1997 and 2018. While PM Stoere and other officials deny wrongdoing, the scandal has prompted high-profile resignations, including World Economic Forum CEO Boerge Brende, and triggered separate police corruption investigations into several prominent diplomats.
// Background
The scandal erupted following the U.S. Department of Justice's release of millions of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein in January 2026. The files exposed extensive global connections to the ultra-rich, politicians, and royals. In Norway, the fallout centered on the International Peace Institute (IPI), a UN-affiliated think tank that received substantial Norwegian government funding and was led by Terje Roed-Larsen, a key diplomat in the 1993 Oslo Accords who had close financial ties to Epstein.
// Key Developments
- Norway's Parliament opens public hearings into 11 current and former ministers over ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
- The probe examines 130 million kroner ($13.5 million) in state funding granted to the International Peace Institute between 1997 and 2018.
- Former Foreign Minister Boerge Brende resigned from his role as WEF chief and apologized for initially lying about his contacts with Epstein.
- Prominent diplomats Terje Roed-Larsen, Mona Juul, and former PM Thorbjoern Jagland are under separate police corruption investigations.
- An independent academic and legal commission has been established to review 30 years of Norwegian diplomatic history, reporting in early 2028.
// Timeline
-
Norway's Foreign Ministry allocates over 130 million kroner ($13.5 million) to the International Peace Institute (IPI).
-
Jonas Gahr Stoere serves as Norway's Foreign Minister.
-
Terje Roed-Larsen resigns as CEO of the International Peace Institute after his financial ties to Epstein are exposed.
-
Former Foreign Minister Boerge Brende falsely denies to the newspaper Aftenposten that he had met Epstein.
-
The U.S. Department of Justice releases millions of Epstein-related documents, sparking global investigations.
-
Norway's Parliament begins public hearings on the Epstein links, with PM Stoere and Boerge Brende testifying.
-
An independent external commission of academics and legal experts is scheduled to submit its final report on the matter.
// Perspectives
[Jonas Gahr Stoere (Prime Minister of Norway)]
Maintains he had no personal relationship with Epstein, asserts that any issues were isolated lapses rather than systemic failures within the Foreign Ministry, and argues Epstein had no influence on Norway's foreign policy.
[Jonas Andersen Sayed (Committee Chair)]
Argues the scandal raises serious questions about abuse of office, accountability failures, and poor management of aid funds, emphasizing the need to restore public trust.
[Erik Solheim (Former Development Minister)]
Warns that the parliamentary probe is an overreaction that risks paralyzing Norway's active peace diplomacy by causing diplomats to exercise unnecessary self-restraint.
[Boerge Brende (Former Foreign Minister)]
Expresses regret for not researching Epstein's background thoroughly before meeting him and apologizes for initially lying to the media about their contact.
// Quotes
“There are many people who have demonstrated very poor judgement.”
“There is no reason to speak of an unhealthy culture at a large organisation just because of what one or several people may have done.”
“Regarding his abuse, had I known what I know today, I would never have been in contact with him, but I should have researched him more. I take responsibility for that.”
