The Question of Criminal Insanity

This is one of those days when a lot is going on and it’s difficult to choose just one topic. But there is one story that raises questions that will have an impact on all of us, everywhere in the world.
Anders Behring Breivik was condemned by a Norwegian court to 21 years in prison for murdering 8 people in an Oslo government building by planting a bomb, and then gunning down 69 young people who were on an island for a political meeting in what we would call “cold blood.”
The court unanimously held that Breivik is not insane, specifically that he is not suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, but rather from anti-social and narcissistic personality disorders.
The sentence amounts to 3.27 MONTHS for every young person he killed. Not very much if you’re trying to put a value on human life.
He will serve the sentence, which can be extended if he shows “dangerous” tendencies, in a prison not far from Oslo. He will be isolated from other prisoners and will have three 8 square-meter rooms at his disposal - one for sleeping, one for exercise, and one for work. He will also be given a PC but without an internet connection.
A recent poll showed that 72% of Norwegians believe he is sane enough to go to prison and not to a psychiatric hospital. However, 54% think the conditions of his imprisonment are too lenient.
Breivik himself did not want to be judged insane. Today, he had to declare that he would not appeal before the judge could pronounce the sentence. When Breivik tried to extend his answer by saying that he was glad that he had been declared sane because that supported his thesis that he was carrying out his racist and zenophobic acts as part of a worldwide organization and started to apologize for not killing more people, his microphone was cut off.
The sentence also raises a basic question about terrorists. Are they obviously insane because they deliberately kill innocent people? Or are they "rationally" driven by their “cause”?
Should they be tried as sane defendants or are they insane, by the very fact of their obsession with their “cause” that leads to murderous actions against innocent people, even children.
If they were incarcerated in psychiatric institutions, would their obsessions disappear with rehabilitative treatments? Nothing is less sure, as, for example, with the terrorists tied to the 9.11 Twin Towers attack who have been incarcerated for many years, who seem to hold fast to their “cause.”
These questions are relatively “easy” in countries in Europe where the death penalty does not exist. But, in the United States, Japan, China and other countries, the Gulf States among others, that maintain the death penalty, the question is vitally important.
Would Berivik have chosen to plead insanity if a death penalty awaited him as a sane person? The Guantanamo detainees seem not to be bothered by the question of facing death for their acts. They often glory in the fact that they will become martyrs. Is this behavior in itself an indication of insanity?
I have no idea what the answers to these questions are. Most mental health professionals will disagree from time to time about whether someone is sane or insane for the purpose of recognizing his being able to recognize his own acts as criminal.
But, we can be sure that the question will become more common as the world’s battle with terrorism continues.