Criminology And Policy Research In Finland
Case 1: KKO 2022:2 – “Berry-Picking Workers” Trafficking Case
Facts:
Several foreign seasonal workers were recruited to work in berry-picking farms in Finland.
The employer exercised control over 26 workers, imposing restrictions on their freedom, keeping part of their wages, and threatening them with dismissal or deportation if they complained.
Workers were dependent on the employer for housing and basic necessities.
Court Proceedings:
The District Court initially convicted the employer of multiple counts of human trafficking.
The Court of Appeal reduced the number of charges, treating the offense as a single act of trafficking.
Supreme Court Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that each worker represented an individual victim, resulting in 26 separate counts of human trafficking.
The court emphasized that each victim’s liberty and personal autonomy were violated individually.
Victim Implications:
Each worker’s experience was recognized legally, strengthening their rights to restitution and reinforcing the seriousness of the employer’s exploitation.
The ruling underscored the importance of individualized victim protection in human trafficking cases.
Case 2: KO R 11/1073 – Sexual Exploitation and Aggravated Trafficking
Facts:
A young woman was coerced into providing sexual services under threat and control by a trafficker.
The trafficker took the majority of her income and restricted her freedom, supplying only minimal sustenance.
Court Decision:
The Pirkanmaa District Court convicted the defendant of aggravated human trafficking and related offenses.
The trafficker received a sentence of 2 years and 6 months imprisonment.
Victim Implications:
The court recognized psychological coercion and financial exploitation as sufficient to constitute human trafficking.
Victim compensation was awarded for the threats and suffering endured.
Significance:
Demonstrated Finnish courts’ willingness to address trafficking in the context of sexual exploitation, not just forced labor.
Reinforced protections for victims subject to both physical and psychological coercion.
Case 3: R 13/3613 – Recruitment and Exploitation of a Czech Woman
Facts:
Two Czech men recruited a woman under false pretenses of legal employment in Finland.
Upon arrival, the victim was forced into sexual services and deprived of autonomy.
Court Ruling:
The defendants were convicted of aggravated human trafficking.
The court emphasized the victim’s vulnerability, including language barriers and lack of local support.
Victim Implications:
Recognized that exploitation can occur through deception and manipulation of vulnerability.
Strengthened judicial acknowledgment of victims’ rights even when coercion is not physically violent.
Significance:
Reinforced the legal understanding that trafficking encompasses deception and abuse of dependent circumstances.
Case 4: Pirkanmaa District Court – Long-Term Captivity and Reproductive Coercion
Facts:
A woman was held captive for over four years by a man and his daughter.
She was forced into sexual relations repeatedly and gave birth to four children under duress.
She had limited freedom and was subjected to continual psychological control.
Court Decision:
The man received 3 years and 10 months imprisonment; his daughter received 2 years and 8 months.
Convictions included aggravated human trafficking, sexual exploitation, and other related offenses.
Victim Implications:
The court recognized the long-term nature of the exploitation and the severe psychological and physical impact.
Affirmed that trafficking can involve multi-year abuse and reproductive control, not just short-term exploitation.
Significance:
Expanded the understanding of human trafficking to include sustained captivity and complex exploitation dynamics.
Case 5: Supreme Court – Psychological Control Without Physical Confinement
Facts:
A minor victim was manipulated into prostitution through threats to her family, even though she was not physically confined.
The trafficker controlled her income and dictated her movements.
Court Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that psychological control and exploitation of vulnerability constitute aggravated human trafficking.
The case set a precedent that physical imprisonment is not required for a trafficking conviction.
Victim Implications:
Reinforced that victims’ psychological safety and autonomy are protected under Finnish law.
Highlighted that coercion can be subtle and indirect yet still criminally significant.
Case 6: Finnish Case – Labour Exploitation and Debt Bondage
Facts:
Migrant workers were recruited for construction work in Finland.
Workers were required to pay high recruitment fees and were threatened with deportation if they complained.
Employers withheld wages and restricted movement.
Court Decision:
Convicted of human trafficking and exploitation of labor, with multiple counts corresponding to individual victims.
Court highlighted the exploitation of dependency and lack of alternatives as key elements.
Victim Implications:
Recognition that financial and social vulnerabilities constitute coercive control.
Affirmed the right to restitution for each worker individually.
Key Themes Across Cases
Multiple Victims: Each victim’s experience is treated as a separate legal violation, even in large-scale labor exploitation.
Forms of Exploitation: Cases show a spectrum—sexual exploitation, forced labor, long-term captivity, reproductive coercion, psychological manipulation.
Vulnerability Matters: Age, immigration status, language barriers, and financial dependence are recognized as factors increasing risk of exploitation.
Victim Rights: Finnish law emphasizes restitution, safe housing, and social services for trafficking victims.
Psychological Coercion Counts: Courts increasingly recognize that trafficking does not require physical confinement; manipulation and threats are sufficient.
RELATED Blog
0 comments