Norway’s largest pension fund, KLP, has said that it will no longer do business with two companies that sell equipment to the Israeli military because the equipment is possibly being used in the war in Gaza.

The two companies are the Oshkosh Corporation, a United States company mostly focused on trucks and military vehicles, and ThyssenKrupp, a German industrial firm that makes a broad selection of products, ranging from elevators and industrial machinery to warships.

“In June 2024, KLP learned of reports from the UN that several named companies were supplying weapons or equipment to the [Israeli army] and that these weapons are being used in Gaza,” Kiran Aziz, the head of responsible investments at KLP Kapitalforvaltning, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

“Our conclusion is that the companies Oshkosh and ThyssenKrupp are contravening our responsible investment guidelines,” the statement said.

“We have therefore decided to exclude them from our investment universe.”

According to the pension fund, it had investments worth $1.8m in Oshkosh and almost $1m in ThyssenKrupp until June 2025.

KLP, founded in 1949 and the country’s largest pension fund, oversees a fund worth about $114bn. It is a public pension fund owned by municipalities and businesses in the public sector, and has a pension scheme that covers about 900,000 people, mostly municipal workers, according to its website.

Vehicles and warships

KLP said that it had been in touch with both companies before it made its decision and that Oshkosh “confirmed that it has sold, and continues to sell, equipment that is used by the [Israeli army] in Gaza”, mostly vehicles and parts for vehicles.

ThyssenKrupp told KLP that “it has a long-term relationship with [the Israeli army]” and that it had delivered four warships of the type Sa’ar 6 to the Israeli Navy in the period November 2020 to May 2021.

The German company also said it had plans to deliver a submarine to the Israeli Navy later this year.

When asked by KLP what checks and balances were made when it came to the use of the equipment the companies delivered, KLP said both Oshkosh and ThyssenKrupp “failed to document the necessary due diligence in relation to their potential complicity in violations of humanitarian law”.

“Companies have an independent duty to exercise due diligence in order to avoid complicity in violations of fundamental human rights and humanitarian law,” said Aziz.

Previous divestments

This is not the first time that the pension fund has divested from companies linked to possible human rights abuses.

In 2021, KLP divested from 16 companies, including telecom giant Motorola, that it concluded were linked to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The pension fund said there was an “unacceptable risk that the excluded companies are contributing to the abuse of human rights in situations of war and conflict through their links with the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank”.

That same year, KLP also said it was divesting from the Indian port and logistics group Adani Ports because of its links to the Myanmar military government.

Last summer, KLP also divested from US firm Caterpillar. In an opinion piece for Al Jazeera, the KLP’s Aziz wrote that Caterpillar’s bulldozers undergo adjustments in Israel by the military and local companies, and are subsequently used in the occupied Palestinian territory.

“The constant use of these weaponised bulldozers in the occupied Palestinian territory has led to a series of human rights warnings from United Nations agencies, and nongovernmental organisations over the last two decades about the company’s involvement in the demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure,” she wrote.

“It is therefore impossible to assert that the company has implemented adequate measures to avoid becoming involved in future norm violations.”

The latest move builds on a series of similar decisions among several large investment funds in Europe that have cut ties with Israeli companies for their involvement in either the war in Gaza or because of links to illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

In May, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the largest in the world, said it would divest from Israel’s Paz Retail and Energy because of the company’s involvement in supplying infrastructure and fuel to illegal Israeli settlements.

This came after an earlier decision in December last year to sell all shares it had in another Israeli company, Bezeq, for its services provided to the illegal settlements.

Other pension funds as well as wealth funds have also, in recent years, distanced themselves from companies accused of enabling or cooperating with Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank or its war on Gaza.

In February 2024, Denmark’s largest pension fund divested from several Israeli banks and companies as the fund feared its investments could be used to fund the settlements in the West Bank.

Six months later, the United Kingdom’s largest pension fund, the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS), said it would sell off all its investments linked to Israel because of its war on Gaza. The fund, which totals about $79bn, said it would sell its $101m worth of investments after pressure from its members.

The jury in the high-profile murder trial of an Australian woman accused of cooking a deadly mushroom lunch for relatives has retired to decide her fate.

Erin Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty to four charges – three of murder and one of attempted murder – over the beef Wellington lunch at her regional Victorian house in July 2023.

The prosecution have claimed Ms Patterson knowingly put toxic death cap mushrooms into the home-cooked meal, before lying to police and disposing of evidence.

But the defence argue Ms Patterson accidentally included the poisonous fungi in the dish and only lied because she panicked after hurting people she loved.

Ms Patterson’s in-laws, Don and Gail Patterson, both 70, along with Gail’s sister Heather Wilkinson, 66, all fell ill and died days after the lunch in Leongatha.

Heather’s husband, local pastor Ian Wilkinson, recovered after weeks in an induced coma. Simon Patterson, the accused’s estranged husband, had been invited to the lunch too, but pulled out the day before.

On Monday, Justice Christopher Beale gave his final instructions to the 14-member jury, summing up evidence from the prosecution and the sole defence witness, Ms Patterson.

After almost two months and more than 50 witnesses, the final 12 jurors were decided by a ballot before the group retired for deliberations.

In her closing arguments, prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC said Ms Patterson has “told so many lies it’s hard to keep track of them”.

The prosecution alleged Ms Patterson lied to her relatives about a cancer diagnosis to convince them to attend the fatal lunch, poisoned them and then faked an illness to cover her tracks.

Ms Patterson’s further lies to police and medical staff about foraging for wild mushrooms, as well as her decision to dump a food dehydrator used to prepare the meal, were evidence of her guilt, they argued.

“She has told lies upon lies because she knew the truth would implicate her,” Nanette Rogers said.

“When she knew her lies had been uncovered, she came up with a carefully constructed narrative to fit with the evidence – almost.”

There was no “particular motive” for the alleged crime, Dr Rogers told the court, but the jury should still have “no difficulty” in rejecting the argument “this was all a horrible foraging accident”.

However, the defence argued the lack of motive was key. Ms Patterson had no reason to kill her guests, they said.

During Ms Patterson’s evidence, she told the jury she was very close to her in-laws and never intended to harm them.

As she was preparing the lunch, Ms Patterson claimed she added mushrooms from a container in her pantry that she now realised may have included both store-bought and foraged mushrooms.

She also told the court she had suffered from bulimia for years, and had made herself throw up after the beef Wellington meal – something her defence team says explains why she did not become as sick as the others who ate it.

The lie about having cancer was because she was embarrassed about plans to get weight-loss surgery, Ms Patterson said, and she didn’t tell authorities the truth about her mushroom foraging hobby because she feared they might blame her for making her relatives sick.

“She’s not on trial for lying,” defence lawyer Colin Mandy SC, “this is not a court of moral judgment”.

He accused the prosecution of trying to force “puzzle pieces” of evidence together, “stretching interpretations, ignoring alternative explanations because they don’t align perfectly with the narrative”.

In his final instructions, Justice Beale told the jury members they alone are the “judges of the facts in this case”.

He said they should not convict Ms Patterson simply for lying, as there are “all sorts of reasons why a person might behave in a way that makes the person look guilty”.

He added that while “any reasonable person would feel great sympathy” for the Patterson and Wilkinson families, jurors also must not allow themselves to be swayed by emotions.

The jury has now been sequestered, which means that while they deliberate, they will stay in supervised accommodation where they will have little to no contact with the outside world until they have reached a decision.