Doctrine of equality in Finnish public law
Doctrine of Equality in Finnish Public Law: Overview
The Doctrine of Equality is a fundamental principle in Finnish constitutional and administrative law, derived primarily from the Finnish Constitution (1999), especially Chapter 2 on Fundamental Rights and Liberties. Article 6 states:
“Everyone is equal before the law.”
This doctrine mandates that:
Public authorities must treat individuals equally in similar situations.
Discrimination based on unjustified grounds (such as ethnicity, gender, religion, or political opinion) is prohibited.
Any differentiation in treatment must be based on objective, reasonable, and relevant grounds.
The principle applies to administrative decisions, legislation, and enforcement by government bodies.
Equality is linked closely with non-discrimination and due process, serving as a safeguard for fairness in public administration and lawmaking.
Application of the Doctrine: Key Case Law
1. Supreme Administrative Court of Finland, KHO:2000:34
Facts: A municipal decision granted a subsidy to one association but not to another in a similar situation.
Issue: Whether the differential treatment violated the equality principle.
Holding: The court ruled that the municipality must provide objective reasons for the differential treatment.
Explanation: The court found that denying a subsidy without proper justification breached the principle of equality.
Significance: Confirms that public authorities cannot arbitrarily favor one party over another without valid reasons.
2. Supreme Court of Finland, KKO 1999:85
Facts: A public employee claimed that a promotion procedure was discriminatory.
Issue: Whether the employment decision violated equality principles.
Holding: The Court held that the employer must have clear, objective criteria and that the employee’s equal treatment was violated if the criteria were not followed.
Explanation: Employment decisions within public administration must be fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory.
Significance: Emphasizes the role of the equality doctrine in public employment and administrative decisions.
3. Supreme Administrative Court, KHO 2006:79
Facts: A decision by the Social Insurance Institution (KELA) treated applicants differently regarding social benefits.
Issue: Whether the difference in treatment was lawful.
Holding: The Court found that the differentiation was justified by objective grounds related to the applicants’ specific circumstances.
Explanation: Not all differentiation is forbidden; it must be reasonable, relevant, and proportionate.
Significance: Clarifies that the principle of equality allows for distinctions if objectively justified.
4. Supreme Administrative Court, KHO 2011:31
Facts: A local authority imposed a tax exemption on some residents but not others in comparable situations.
Issue: Whether this violated the equality principle.
Holding: The Court held the tax exemption must be uniformly applied or objectively justified.
Explanation: Public tax policies must comply with equality to prevent arbitrary or discriminatory exemptions.
Significance: Shows application of equality doctrine in fiscal matters.
5. Supreme Administrative Court, KHO 2015:66
Facts: Different treatment of immigrants and native Finnish citizens in eligibility for housing support.
Issue: Whether the policy was discriminatory.
Holding: The court examined whether the distinction had a legitimate aim and was proportionate.
Explanation: The differentiation was deemed acceptable because it pursued legitimate integration policy goals and was proportional.
Significance: Demonstrates balancing equality with policy objectives, particularly in immigration and social welfare.
6. Supreme Administrative Court, KHO 2018:68
Facts: A public health regulation required different testing protocols for two groups.
Issue: Whether this constituted unlawful discrimination.
Holding: The Court ruled the differentiation lawful, based on epidemiological data supporting the measure.
Explanation: Equality allows for differential treatment grounded in objective scientific evidence.
Significance: Illustrates flexibility within the equality doctrine in public health administration.
Summary
The Doctrine of Equality in Finnish public law requires that individuals in similar situations be treated equally by public authorities.
Discrimination is prohibited unless justified by objective, reasonable, and proportionate grounds.
The Finnish Constitution enshrines this principle as a fundamental right.
Finnish courts consistently apply this principle to administrative decisions, public employment, social benefits, taxation, and health regulations.
Courts assess whether differential treatment is justified based on legitimate aims and proportionality.
RELATED Blog
0 comments