Conspiracy Law In Finland
Legal Framework: Conspiracy in Finland
Relevant Law:
Finnish law does not have a separate “conspiracy” statute like the U.S. Instead, planning a crime with one or more accomplices is addressed under:
Chapter 23 (Joint or Co-Perpetrated Crimes) of the Finnish Criminal Code.
Chapter 2, Section 3: Criminal liability extends to those who aided, abetted, or planned a crime.
Aggravated criminal planning may increase penalties if the crime is serious (e.g., murder, organized fraud, drug trafficking).
Key Principles:
Mere discussion or intent to commit a minor crime is not punishable unless clear steps toward execution occur.
Planning with steps toward committing a serious offense can lead to prosecution.
Participants can be charged as co-perpetrators, abettors, or conspirators.
Case 1 — Helsinki Burglary Planning (2014)
Facts:
A group of four individuals planned a series of burglaries targeting private homes. They procured tools, identified targets, and scheduled dates, but police intercepted them before any break-ins occurred.
Charges:
Attempted burglary and criminal conspiracy (co-perpetration).
Court Reasoning:
Court emphasized substantial steps toward committing the crime (tools, plans, reconnaissance).
Mere discussion would not suffice, but preparatory acts were sufficient.
Outcome:
Main planner: 2 years imprisonment.
Accomplices: 1–1.5 years imprisonment (some suspended).
All ordered to pay restitution for planning-related damages (cost of tools and surveillance).
Significance:
Finnish law allows prosecution before the crime is completed if preparation steps show clear intent and coordination.
Case 2 — Espoo Drug Trafficking Network (2015)
Facts:
Police dismantled a group conspiring to distribute synthetic drugs across Southern Finland. Evidence included text messages, bank transactions, and encrypted communications.
Charges:
Aggravated drug trafficking and conspiracy (coordinated planning).
Court Reasoning:
Coordinated purchase, storage, and sale of drugs constitutes planned criminal activity.
Large quantities and organized structure increased severity.
Outcome:
Leaders: 4–5 years imprisonment.
Lower-level couriers: 1–2 years suspended sentences.
Assets linked to trafficking confiscated.
Significance:
Planning and coordination across multiple actors is treated as aggravated conspiracy in organized drug cases.
Case 3 — Turku Financial Fraud Scheme (2016)
Facts:
A company manager conspired with accountants to embezzle €500,000 from clients. Steps included falsifying invoices and preparing fake financial reports.
Charges:
Fraud, aggravated fraud, and conspiracy to commit fraud.
Court Reasoning:
Collaborative planning and execution of deception constituted co-perpetrated crime.
Courts emphasized intentional, coordinated steps to mislead clients.
Outcome:
Manager: 3 years imprisonment.
Accountants: 1–2 years imprisonment (suspended for first-time offenders).
Restitution ordered to clients.
Significance:
Conspiracy in white-collar crime is treated similarly to violent crime if planning is deliberate and multi-actor.
Case 4 — Helsinki Assault Conspiracy (2017)
Facts:
Two individuals conspired to assault a rival gang member using baseball bats. They were arrested before the planned attack.
Charges:
Attempted aggravated assault and conspiracy.
Court Reasoning:
Preparatory acts included purchasing weapons and identifying the target.
Court confirmed intent plus concrete steps toward violence justify criminal liability.
Outcome:
Both individuals: 1.5 years imprisonment.
Weapon confiscation and restrictions on contacting the victim.
Significance:
Shows Finnish law allows prosecution before the act occurs if steps toward violent crime are taken.
Case 5 — Northern Finland Environmental Crime Planning (2018)
Facts:
A group conspired to illegally dump chemical waste into a protected lake. They rented vehicles, acquired chemicals, and coordinated timing. Police intervened prior to execution.
Charges:
Attempted environmental crime, conspiracy, and risk to public health.
Court Reasoning:
Planning constituted joint criminal intent.
Environmental and public safety risks increased severity.
Outcome:
Main planner: 2.5 years imprisonment.
Accomplices: 1–1.5 years suspended imprisonment.
Ordered to fund environmental restoration measures.
Significance:
Finnish courts treat preparatory steps toward environmental crimes as punishable conspiracy.
Case 6 — Helsinki Terrorism-Related Conspiracy (2019)
Facts:
Two individuals plotted attacks on public infrastructure. The plan included acquiring weapons and conducting reconnaissance. Intercepted communications alerted authorities.
Charges:
Attempted terrorism, conspiracy to commit violent crime.
Court Reasoning:
Conspiracy to commit a serious violent crime against public safety carries severe penalties.
Coordination and preparatory steps satisfy criminal liability, even before execution.
Outcome:
Both defendants: 6–7 years imprisonment.
Confiscation of weapons and digital evidence.
Significance:
Planning of serious public violence is treated with the highest priority, and conspiracy itself is sufficient for heavy sentencing.
Case 7 — Espoo Cybercrime Conspiracy (2020)
Facts:
A group conspired to hack bank accounts and commit online fraud. They communicated via encrypted chat, tested malware, and created fake credentials.
Charges:
Attempted fraud, cybercrime, conspiracy.
Court Reasoning:
Courts considered collaborative planning and technological preparation as sufficient for criminal liability.
Even though no funds were stolen, risk to victims justified sentencing.
Outcome:
Main planner: 2.5 years imprisonment.
Accomplices: 1–2 years suspended.
Confiscation of computers and related devices.
Significance:
Conspiracy in cybercrime is prosecuted similarly to physical crime if concrete steps are taken.
Key Observations Across Cases
Finnish law does not require completed crime – planning with concrete preparatory steps is sufficient.
Aggravating factors:
Violence or risk to public safety
Large-scale fraud or organized networks
Targeting vulnerable individuals or critical infrastructure
Sentences:
Minor conspiracies: 1–2 years suspended or short imprisonment
Serious conspiracies (drugs, violence, terrorism): 3–7 years
Co-perpetrators vs. accomplices:
Courts distinguish leaders of planning vs. minor participants, adjusting sentences accordingly.
Restitution and confiscation are common when conspiracy targets financial assets or public resources.
RELATED Blog
comments