The High Court has ruled on the case of the failure of a 3-year-old

On November 5 last year, a 28-year-old man was sentenced in Sermersooq Circuit Court under the Criminal Code's section on violation of family or household.

The sentence at the time was three months in prison.

The man was sentenced because he went to a pub shortly after midnight on January 19, 2025 and left his 3-year-old son for a period until the following day. The following morning, the boy went out in the cold weather wearing only underwear to look for his father in Nuussuaq.

The 28-year-old man confessed in the district court, but still appealed to the Greenland High Court in the hope of a more lenient decision.

He succeeded, as the High Court on Wednesday afternoon changed his sentence from three months in prison to 80 hours of community service.

The High Court did not elaborate on why it had reached a different result than the district court.

A unique case

The convicted man was clearly affected by the situation during the court's review and aware that he had made a big mistake. It was important for him and his defense attorney to emphasize that the incident in January is far from normal behavior on his part.

– It is a serious case. But I want to emphasize that it is a one-off case. An isolated case on a single day. It is important to remember, said the defense attorney, Naja Joelsen.

The little boy is currently living with a foster family in Nuuk. According to the defense attorney, the only reason the boy is now living elsewhere is because of the 28-year-old father's housing situation.

– He does not have any substance abuse problems, Naja Joelsen said in court.

No previous cases

The 28-year-old man works outside Nuuk, but is striving for a permanent job and a suitable place to live in the city. He said this himself when the judge gave him the final word in the case before the jury went to vote.

– I cannot do without my son, he said.

The case was particularly important because it is apparently the first verdict from the Greenland High Court under the section on violation of family or household. In any case, neither the prosecutor nor the defense attorney had been able to find previous Greenlandic cases.

The outcome of this case may therefore have implications for similar cases in the future.

The special nature of the case also meant that the defense attorney had requested the presence of lay judges in court. They do not usually participate in confession cases. However, the High Court decided to grant the defense attorney's request in this case.