Charles Lane on Norwegian Criminal Law

I was lucky enough, unlike a number of other commentators, to be on the road on Friday when news of the attacks in Norway broke--and thus missed the opportunity to make an assumption that proved spectactularly wrong about who the perpetrator was and what cause he believed required the deaths of dozens of his countrymen. I have no creative way to express the revulsion that everyone shares anyway, so I won't add to the many efforts to try. I did, however, find this Washington Post piece by Charles Lane on the relevant Norwegian law and incarceration norms very interesting and upsetting. If Lane is right--and he's an excellent and reliable reporter--here's what Anders Behring Breivik can expect to receive in the way of punishment:

As in other European countries, the death penalty does not exist in Norway. Nor does Norway provide for life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The maximum prison time under Norwegian law is 21 years, with the possibility of parole. (There is no provision for consecutive sentences.) A Norwegian court can, however, order additional detention in five-year increments beyond the 21-year limit, if persuaded that the offender poses a continuing threat to the community. Such extensions are apparently rare in Norway -- though if anyone seems likely to remain confined indefinitely, it would be Breivik. Nevertheless, the state will bear the burden of periodically arguing for his continued incarceration. Prison conditions, even for violent offenders, are remarkably comfortable, even gentle. By law, Norway’s murderers start out in high-security prison, but we’re not talking about a U.S.-style “SuperMax”: all inmates retain their right to vote, and at least some high-security prisoners have kitchens and enjoy Internet access. After a time, they must be “assessed with a view to transferring them to a lower level of security.” The Norwegian Correctional Service’s Website makes no mention of punishment, but does refer to “services” to which inmates are “entitled.”

I'm not sure the trans-Atlantic divide is wider on any issue than it is on criminal justice matters--on which the United States and Europe simply do not speak the same moral language.