In 2019, the man was sentenced to 20 years in custody, with a minimum term of 13 years and 4 months, which the Supreme Court later reduced to 12 years.
In 2022, the man’s defender, Øystein Storrvik, applied to have the sentencing resumed, because between 2015 and 2019 his client was body searched at least 287 times while he was in custody in Oslo prison and served time in Ullersmo prison, writes Aftenposten.
The defender argued that routine strip searches were contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment. The convicted did not want compensation, but compensation in the form of a reduced sentence.
The Supreme Court, which dealt with the case last week, states that the practice of frequent body searches without concrete justification is a violation of human rights. The Supreme Court therefore gave him an additional deduction of 144 days in his sentence. In total, the deduction, including custody and serving of previous convictions, was 1,925 days, a good five years.
The Correctional Service states that the practice of routine body searches ended in 2020 and that new guidelines have been introduced.
#Man #convicted #murder #shorter #sentence #illegal #strip #searches
**Interview with Øystein Storrvik, Defense Attorney**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Mr. Storrvik. The recent ruling by the Supreme Court on your client’s case has garnered significant attention. Can you explain the importance of the court’s decision regarding routine strip searches?
**Øystein Storrvik:** Absolutely. The Supreme Court’s acknowledgment that frequent body searches without concrete justification constitute a violation of human rights is crucial. It underscores the need for correctional facilities to respect the dignity of inmates, regardless of their offenses. This ruling serves as a precedent, potentially influencing how prisons manage security procedures while upholding human rights standards.
**Interviewer:** Many people might question the leniency shown by the court by reducing a convicted murderer’s sentence due to the routine searches. What would you say to those who feel that this undermines justice?
**Øystein Storrvik:** It’s a common perspective. However, the principle of justice should encompass fairness and human dignity. The court is not undermining justice; rather, it reinforces the notion that punishment should not equate to inhumane treatment. Addressing deficiencies in the penal system is necessary for true justice to prevail.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned that the Correctional Service ended the practice of routine strip searches in 2020. What steps do you believe need to be taken to ensure that such violations don’t occur in the future?
**Øystein Storrvik:** It’s imperative that correctional facilities establish clear, evidence-based guidelines for searches that protect inmates’ rights. Training staff on these new protocols and ensuring accountability through oversight will be key to preventing future violations.
**Interviewer:** some might argue that the safety of society should come first, even if that means compromising on certain prisoners’ rights. How do you respond to that?
**Øystein Storrvik:** Balancing public safety with human rights is a complex issue. However, history has shown us that disregarding human rights can lead to systemic abuses and broader societal harm. A society’s strength is often reflected in how it treats its most vulnerable members, including those sentenced for crimes.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Mr. Storrvik, for sharing your insights on this complex and sensitive issue.
**Reader Debate Question:** Do you think the court’s decision to reduce a convicted murderer’s sentence due to human rights violations in prison reflects a necessary balance between justice and dignity, or does it risk undermining the seriousness of the crime committed?
