These complaints Breivik on – NRK

22. July terrorist has sued the state for human rights violations, and Oslo District Court processes for safety and practical reasons, the case in høysikkerhetsfengselet in Skien, where Breivik zones. The case will start on Tuesday 15 March, and it is set aside four days for the case.

Breivik gets 3.5 hours to explain itself, it emerges of the final post sent to the Oslo District Court.

– We have gone through how much time he needs explanation. He will talk about how he has been in prison, and what he wants that he does not have now, says lawyer Øystein Storrvik NRK.

– Are you sure he will not spend time to his political message?

BREIVIK-ADVOKAT Øystein Storrvik.

Photo: Ruud, Vidar / NTB scanpix

– the time set by him is needed to what is relevant to the case. I never overrides a client’s explanation, but that’s the plan. The court will also rule this out strictly in terms of relevance to the case, said Storrvik.

NRK has previously announced that the Oslo District Court did not allow broadcasting of Breivik’s explanation, partly because the court fears that terrorist will send coded messages to supporters .

Mass killings husband complaints including the use of handcuffs and limitations in opportunities to send letters, and mean special insulation and communication control involves human rights violations.

Storrvik printer in his closing statement to the Oslo District Court that the case is not directed against the validity of certain measures, but at an overall assessment of Breivik’s situation.

State closing statement is not published yet.

Naked ransacked Ila

Storrvik writes that the purpose of the subpoena is to bring prison conditions in accordance with the commitments in the European Convention on human Rights.

About the period of Ila writes lawyer that it was “characterized by intrusive control measures in the form of extensive use of coercive measures (handcuffs) including gripemanøer, daily nude searchings and frequent use of body examination with metal detector,” writes Storrvik.

– Was it not necessary?

– it was very much of it at first. We believe that a period had a too large extent, responds Storrvik.

The European Convention on Human Rights

• Breivik lawyer believes prison conditions violate two articles of the European Convention on human Rights (ECHR):
• Article 3: No one shall be subjected to torture or ummenneskelig and degrading treatment or punishment.
• Article 8: Right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence.
• (Source: Lovdata)

He also writes that Breivik was subject to an extensive isolation and strict letter control. Only visit from non-professional actors was a five minutes long visit from her mother, they could give each other a hug.

There are insulation Storrvik think is the most important in the case.

– Who is that Breivik wants to have contact with?

– He has several requirements in that direction, and I can not go specifically into that.

– it’s a point that he can not have contact with sympathizers outside?

– Yes, and that is the dilemma in this matter. It has several considerations that are applicable. The question is whether security can be safeguarded without getting an isolation of him which are Contracting unconstitutional. That’s the whole case is about.

– Would he have contact with people who do not share his political views?

– There he comes to to explain a bit about the case. It goes without saying that he wants contact with people interested in the same thing as himself, responds Storrvik.

The lawyer believes inter alia that Breivik must be able to have contact with other inmates.

In the final post to Storrvik it emerged that Breivik had telephone contact with a person unrelated to the prison, but that Breivik broke contact.

HERE DOES mATTER: Oslo District Court has moved the case to the gymnasium in Skien prison. The case will start on Tuesday 15 March.

Photo: Poppe, Cornelius / NTB scanpix

Insulation Damage

the conditions of detention in Skien prison has been amended three times, but Breivik believes nevertheless that Article 3 and 8 of the Convention on Human Rights are violated during all periods.

Lawyer Storrvik places particular emphasis on the isolation that has lasted for nearly five years and inability to form relationships with others.

Storrvik cites the following factors on the basis of practice in the European ECHR:

• the plaintiff has been completely cut off from contact with other inmates, except for free until today. This is a key point in relation to the key definitions of isolation.
• The plaintiff has very limited contact with prison officers, any more after Siviliombudsmannens inspection. This is regardless of contact based on professional distance and rotation between staff, with the aim that it should not be established relationships between the plaintiff and the officers.
• No visit from other, non-professional actors.
• Approval regime for visits are so strict that in practice prevents visits. After the illuminated Professor Mattias Gardell conducted visits as the only one. He was an expert in the criminal case. The visit was with glass wall.
• The plaintiff has a permanent visitors of our site is perceived as a professional player with limited contact. This also happens with glass wall.
• After ECHR practices are also in contact with a lawyer / advocate significance. We’ll only visit plaintiff with glass walls and we have received a refusal preparatory without glass wall.
• Letters contact has a period been totally disrupted. Plaintiff is further subject to such a strict control letter that he experiences not being able to build relationships through letters.
• jack with the outside world is also severely limited. Which people he wants to talk with do not seem to correspond with persons prison may allow. He has had an approved, regular telephone contact he himself did not want to continue.
• In our view shows the submitted material prepared insulation damage. It is argued that this did not meet with adequate medical treatment. EMD practice requires special vigilance in a case like this. We believe it was not exercised in his case.

– I can mention one example, and that is that he has stopped studying. For me it’s a sign that he is characterized by isolation. The other examples I will come back to the issue, says Storrvik.

The Attorney General has asked Oslo District Court that six witnesses to testify behind closed doors. Decision in the matter has not come yet.