In Norway, a high-profile case centered on Anders Behring Breivik, the man behind the 2011 terror attacks, drew ongoing attention to how prisoners are treated and how legal challenges regarding confinement are handled. AFP reported that Breivik lost the latest lawsuit he filed against the Norwegian state, a case focused on what he described as inhumane prison conditions. The ruling came from a court in Oslo, with the news later confirmed by RIA News. [AFP] [RIA News]
Breivik’s legal action arose from his assertion that the conditions of his detention were unacceptable. The suit highlighted his concerns about isolation and the overall treatment of inmates deemed dangerous or high-profile within the Norwegian penal system. The decision to reject his claim marks another turn in a long and controversial saga about the balance between security measures and the rights of prisoners. The case also underscores how Norwegian courts evaluate arguments about prison conditions, even in relation to individuals convicted of serious violent crimes. [AFP]
The background of the case traces back to Breivik’s January filing, which referenced his confinement and the perceived severity of his isolation. The questions at issue involved the impact of lengthy solitary conditions on a person previously judged sane by the courts, and how such conditions align with Norway’s commitments to humane treatment within its penal framework.
On July 22, 2011, Breivik carried out a car bombing near Norway’s government complex in Oslo. He subsequently traveled to Utøya, where he attacked a youth summer camp associated with the Labor Party. He acted alone, and his stated aim was to protest what he viewed as Norway’s political and social policies. While Breivik admitted to the crimes, he did not acknowledge guilt in the sense of accepting responsibility under the law. In 2012, Norwegian authorities found him mentally competent to stand trial, and he received a 21-year prison sentence, the maximum allowed for a terrorist offense under Norwegian law. As part of Norwegian legal practice, a standard period of prison time can potentially be extended through a review process, and a minimum term is commonly used as a basis for consideration of release in the future. [RIA News]
As the years passed, there were public discussions about parole eligibility, given the duration of the sentence and Norway’s parole provisions. By the time the minimum term expired, debates intensified about whether parole could be granted or if Breivik’s release would be considered under the national legal framework. In February 2022, Norwegian authorities denied any release on parole, reinforcing the strict controls in place for individuals convicted of such serious crimes. The episode illustrates how the Norwegian system handles parole decisions for high-risk offenders, balancing safety concerns with the legal avenues available to those serving long sentences. [RIA News]