Abstract
In the summer of 2011, Anders Behring Breivik committed a terrorist attack in Norway in which 77 people were killed, and at least 319 more were injured. This paper analyses several aspects of the deadliest attack on European soil since World War II, primarily the psychological background of this crime and its legal implications. The paper consists of three sections. The first section presents the comparative and legal basics of criminal insanity that is necessary in order to understand the sections that follow. The second section deals with the perpetrator’s psychological profile and the great debate that had ensued due to the contradicting reports of the Norwegian experts. The last section of the paper summarises the essence of the previous two sections while presenting a comparative procedural analysis of hypothetical trials in select jurisdictions. This paper is based on a comparative analysis of legal norms that aims to highlight the high complexity of the issue. The Breivik case has been selected as an ideal example because, on the one hand, it has created a number of contradicting opinions within its domestic legal system while, on the other hand, its universal nature makes it suitable for a more complex comparative analysis.
Highlights
The issue of criminal insanity presents one of the oldest issues in criminal law
Issue no. 1: (In) the first part of this paper, we analysed the issue of insanity in substantive criminal law; this issue is not so problematic per se, but it is interesting when approached from multiple different perspectives
In light of that goal, Norway, Croatia, France and Russia were selected as examples of a pure civil law model, while Turkey could be included only tentatively because it displays significant differences from traditional civil law concepts
Summary
The issue of criminal insanity presents one of the oldest issues in criminal law. Insanity based on psychiatric disturbances is generally viewed as the basis to exclude the perpetrator from criminal liability. Anders Behring Breivik’s murderous rampage was the most lethal attack in Norway since World War II, while the mass murder on Utøya represents the most lethal mass attack by an individual using a firearm anywhere in the world His case received strong media attention and incited fear all over Europe, especially due to it not seeming like the act of a lone madman or maniac, but rather like a series of actions meticulously planned by a highly composed individual. This is why there were great disagreements in Norway regarding the state of mind of Anders Behring Breivik, leading to a significant amount of discord between Norwegian legal experts. The analysis presented in this paper will show that a hypothetical Breivik is possible anytime, anywhere, and that countries are not unequivocally prepared to react to that potential issue
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
