Geir Lippestad

In July 2011, he was appointed as defence counsel for Anders Behring Breivik, the perpetrator of the 2011 Norway attacks, after the latter specifically requested him.[8][11][12] His co-lead counsel was Vibeke Hein Bæra, and they were assisted by assistant counsels Tord Jordet and Odd Ivar Grøn, both of whom are employed at his law firm.[13]

Before the trial Lippestad told the French newspaper Le Monde: "I feel I have lost my soul in this case [...] I hope to get it back once it's over – and that it will be in the same condition as before." [13] At the trial, Lippestad chose not to argue for the innocence of his client, although Breivik himself had specifically requested to be acquitted due to the legal principle of necessity. In his closing arguments, Lippestad asked only for his client to be found sane and to be sentenced leniently without mentioning the subject of culpability.[14] In a bizarre moment of confusion, the presiding judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen asked Lippestad if he would request an acquittal for his client, to which Lippestad replied that he would not. Breivik then interceded and told Lippestad; "You've got to do it!" after which Lippestad formally requested an acquittal.[15]

Although Lippestad successfully argued before the court that his client was legally sane and competent, Breivik was found guilty and sentenced to the maximum penalty of 21 years in containment.[16] The prosecution had asked for Breivik to be formally acquitted and found legally insane, and sentenced to mandatory psychiatric confinement. This was rejected by the court.[17] After the sentencing of Breivik, Lippestad formally transferred the legal responsibility of his client within the law-firm to Tord Jordet, thereby ceasing to be his official defence attorney.[18]

Following the Breivik case, Lippestad experienced a significant increase in financial revenue. He expanded his law-firm, hired new staff and opened another branch in Skien, which would serve as the main office, in addition to the office in down-town Oslo.[19][20][21] In January 2014, the law firm Lippestad signed a contract with the Norwegian Police Federation, the trade union organizing all employees in the police sector in Norway. The agreement included assisting with all types of legal issues that members would have. It also included legal representation in cases where police officers are accused of criminal offences, as well as Lippestad holding lectures and speaking at events organized by the Police Federation.[22]

Lippestad is an active member of the Norwegian Labour Party, and has been deputy chair of its Nordstrand local chapter.[23] In April 2013, he was invited as a keynote speaker at the annual Labour party congress. During his speech to the delegates, he spoke about humanity and human values.[24] He sharply criticised the treatment of Roma people in the city of Oslo.[25]

In December 2013, Lippestad was appointed chairman of the new left-wing think tank Agenda.[26] The think-tank was established with support from the trade union centre as well as the Labour party and intended as a left-wing counter-weight to the influential liberal think-tank Civita.[27]

In 2014 it was revealed that the Labour Party was considering Lippestad as a mayoral candidate for Oslo in the 2015 local elections due to him being a highly respected person who could possibly rival the popular incumbent conservative mayor Fabian Stang.[28] The Labour party had not had a mayor of Oslo in 20 years, and a majority of the Oslo chapter felt that Lippestad possessed the "broad appeal" necessary to pose serious challenge to mayor Stang.[29] In September 2014 however, Lippestad told the party that he did not want to be nominated.[30] In the 2015 Norwegian local elections he was instead elected as a member of Oslo city council.[31] He also served as Oslo City Commissioner for Trade and Ownership from 2015 to 2017.

In 2020, he co-founded a new political party named Sentrum (The Centre); as of September 2020 it does not yet have the five thousand signatures needed, to become one of the parties in the 2021 parliamentary election.[32]

An outspoken advocate for the rights of people with physical disabilities, especially children, Lippestad was in 2014 awarded the "Defender of Human Life" award by the Pro-Life organisation Menneskeverd. In its citation, the jury wrote that the Lippestad couple reflects a set of values where respect and an unwavering belief in human life, no matter what situation you are in, is the basis.[33] At the event, Lippestad called for a reduction in the number of abortions. He also spoke out against what he believes is an expectation from society that parents should abort fetuses with genetic disorders.[34] He later echoed his statements in an interview with Dagbladet, claiming that there is a lack of options for mothers who wish to give birth to a child with disability. He also stated that: "Many are aborted almost automatically, and that is very sad."[35]

In 2013 he was appointed chairman of the Kirkens Familievern Foundation, a charity which aims to promote family values, as well as offer assistance to families or couples. Its activities also includes strengthening the family, marriage, parenting, relationship and singles' position in the church and society.[36] He is chairman of Youth For Understanding in Norway, an organization which promotes international peace and tolerance, by exchange programs.[37][38]

In the aftermath of the 22-July trial, Lippestad caused controversy when he wrote a book about the trial called "That which we may stand for" (Norwegian: Det vi kan stå for). In the book Lippestad included full conversations which he had between himself and Breivik, which took place within the prison in full confidentiality. The book caused fierce reaction and condemnation from the legal establishment in Norway, some calling the book illegal.[42] Lippestad defended himself and the book by stating that Breivik had absolved him of the attorney-client privilege, as well as given him permission to write the book.[43]

Many high-profile attorneys as well as legal scholars were of the opinion that Lippestad had breached the attorney-client privilege as well being disloyal to his client. The leader of the Norwegian Bar Association Berit Reiss-Andersen accused Lippestad of exploiting his role as a defence attorney in order to create "another platform for himself in the public sphere". Other lawyers called the book "social pornography" and "an obvious breach of ethics". The Association of Defence Attorneys (Norwegian: Forsvarergruppen) unanimously voted to refer the case to the Bar Association's Main Board for possible sanctions.[44] The board subsequently ordered Lippestad to send a formal reply explaining his case within three weeks, which he did.[45] After formally hearing the case, the Main Board unanimously ruled that Lippestad had not breached legal ethics, thereby avoiding sanctions.[46]