You raise a good point. Is the judges decision representing the will of the people?
In other words surely Brevik can only see people if they want to see him.
Why should Brevik be allowed to see people if they do not want to see him? Brevik is in a prison for a reason surely!! It is not simply about Brevik's rights, surely it is about other peoples rights as well as the animals and the trees etc..
If some want to kill Brevik and he wants to die can that be accommodated or is their some associated suicide through implementation ruling to be determined?
In the law of the jungle Brevik would not have been feed scraps. He would have died from starvation at least from an inability to meet the will of the people through an inability to fund his life.
Why is Brevik entitled to be subsidised by Norway's taxpayers to sustain his life? If so why are other taxpayers not entitled to equivalent benefits and therefore discriminated against? Why are other Norway residents not entitled to a similar basic income?
Why do prisoners worldwide not come out with a debt to be paid to taxpayers for subsidised life sustainability between cell walls? Japan seems to be unsustainable, where could it be sustainable in a world determined by the will of the people and why?
