06:50 GMT28 September 2020
Listen Live
    Get short URL
    0 13

    The Norwegian Supreme Court refused to consider mass murderer Anders Breivik's appeal against the state, in which he claims that a number of EU laws prohibiting degrading punishment were breached during his imprisonment, local media reported Thursday, citing the court’s decision.

    STOCKHOLM (Sputnik) – In 2016, a court in Oslo ruled that Breivik's rights had been violated in prison, in particular the violations included "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" as defined by article three of the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as periods of isolation of up to 23 hours. In March an appeal court rejected the verdict, stressing that Breivik still remained under influence of extremist ideas. Earlier in the day, the Norwegian Supreme Court refused to consider the issue thus upholding the appeal court’s decision.

    The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) will examine, whether the complaint submitted by Norwegian mass killer Anders Breivik complied with the criteria set by the European Convention on Human Rights and may make a decision on further consideration of the request, a ECHR representative told Sputnik on Thursday.

    "In general, any valid application will be examined by the Court, which must first examine whether the application complies with the admissibility criteria set out in the European Convention on Human Rights before eventually examining the merits," the representative said.

    On July 22, 2011, Breivik bombed a government building in Oslo, killing eight people. On the same day, he traveled to a Norwegian Labor Party youth camp on the Utoya island dressed as a police officer. There, he fatally shot 69 people, most of whom were teenagers. Breivik's main motive for the attacks was to promote his far-right militant ideology.

    The mass murderer was sentenced to 21 years in prison for the attacks – the maximum sentence allowed under Norwegian law.

    human rights abuse, Anders Breivik, Norway
    Community standardsDiscussion