Drug Crime Research In Finland
1. Legal Framework for Drug Crimes in Finland
Relevant Legislation
Criminal Code of Finland (Rikoslaki 39/1889, Chapter 50 – Narcotics Offences)
Section 50(1): Narcotics Offence (Huumausaineen käyttörikos/possession) – Possession, purchase, or use of controlled substances without authorization.
Section 50(2): Aggravated Narcotics Offence – Larger quantities, trafficking, or organized distribution.
Section 50(3): Assisting in Narcotics Offence – Includes smuggling, cultivation, or aiding in production.
Act on Narcotics (373/2008) – Defines controlled substances and administrative measures for rehabilitation.
Focus of Finnish Drug Law Enforcement
Prohibition approach: Manufacturing, trafficking, and unlicensed use are criminalized.
Rehabilitation and treatment: For personal use, diversion to health services is encouraged.
Proportionality: Sentences depend on quantity, intent, and prior record.
2. Patterns of Drug Crimes in Finland
Types of Drugs: Cannabis, amphetamines, MDMA, cocaine, and opioids.
Common Offences:
Personal use possession
Small-scale street distribution
Large-scale trafficking or organized crime
Emerging Issues: Online drug sales, darknet marketplaces, and synthetic drugs.
3. Finnish Case Law Illustrating Drug Crimes
Case 1: Helsinki District Court (2014) – Personal Possession
Facts: 22-year-old male found in possession of 10 grams of cannabis.
Legal Issue: Distinguishing personal use from intent to distribute.
Court Findings:
Quantity was deemed for personal use.
No evidence of distribution (scales, packaging, contacts).
Outcome: Conditional fine; no custodial sentence.
Significance: Finnish courts consider quantity, context, and intent when sentencing personal use.
Case 2: Turku Court of Appeal (2015) – Drug Trafficking
Facts: 28-year-old male transported 500 grams of amphetamines across regional borders.
Legal Issue: Trafficking and aggravating factors.
Court Findings:
Large quantity and organized transport increased severity.
Prior convictions and risk to public health considered.
Outcome: Three-year prison sentence.
Significance: Demonstrates strict penalties for trafficking and large-scale operations.
Case 3: Oulu District Court (2016) – Synthetic Drugs Online Sale
Facts: 19-year-old sold synthetic cannabinoids via internet.
Legal Issue: Application of narcotics law to new psychoactive substances.
Court Findings:
New substances classified as controlled under the law.
Online sale considered aggravating factor due to broader impact.
Outcome: Two-year prison sentence and confiscation of proceeds.
Significance: Shows Finnish courts adapt drug laws to new synthetic and digital markets.
Case 4: Espoo Court (2017) – Aggravated Narcotics Offence
Facts: 35-year-old involved in multi-year trafficking network of cocaine and MDMA.
Legal Issue: Aggravated narcotics offence under Section 50(2).
Court Findings:
Large-scale operation, cross-border involvement, organized structure.
Risk to public safety and prior convictions.
Outcome: Seven-year custodial sentence and seizure of assets.
Significance: Illustrates enhanced punishment for organized and repeated trafficking.
Case 5: Tampere District Court (2018) – Assisting in Drug Offences
Facts: 24-year-old provided storage facilities for heroin distribution.
Legal Issue: Complicity under Section 50(3).
Court Findings:
Awareness and active participation in storage operations confirmed.
Outcome: Conditional sentence with probation.
Significance: Highlights accountability for aiding and abetting, even without direct distribution.
Case 6: Helsinki Court of Appeal (2019) – Repeat User Diversion
Facts: 21-year-old with multiple cannabis possession offences.
Legal Issue: Balancing punishment with rehabilitation.
Court Findings:
Previous offences noted, but treatment and counseling offered as alternative.
Outcome: Conditional sentence; referred to outpatient drug treatment program.
Significance: Demonstrates Finnish emphasis on rehabilitation for non-violent, personal-use offenders.
4. Key Observations from Finnish Drug Crime Cases
Distinction Between Use and Trafficking:
Small personal amounts → fines or conditional sentences.
Large quantities or organized distribution → custodial sentences.
Aggravating Factors:
Cross-border trafficking, organized networks, synthetic drugs, prior convictions.
Emerging Trends:
Courts address online sales and new psychoactive substances dynamically.
Complicity and Support Roles:
Providing storage, transport, or other aid may attract penalties even without direct distribution.
Rehabilitation Emphasis:
Non-violent personal users often diverted to treatment programs rather than prison.
5. Summary Table of Finnish Drug Crime Cases
| Year | Court | Offender | Offence | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | Helsinki DC | 22 | Cannabis possession | Conditional fine | Personal use distinguished from trafficking |
| 2015 | Turku CoA | 28 | Amphetamine trafficking | 3 yrs prison | Large-scale transport increases severity |
| 2016 | Oulu DC | 19 | Synthetic cannabinoid online sale | 2 yrs prison, confiscation | Digital and synthetic drugs prosecuted |
| 2017 | Espoo DC | 35 | Multi-year cocaine/MDMA network | 7 yrs prison | Aggravated trafficking and organized crime |
| 2018 | Tampere DC | 24 | Assisting heroin distribution | Conditional sentence | Complicity penalized |
| 2019 | Helsinki CoA | 21 | Repeat cannabis possession | Conditional + treatment | Rehabilitation for non-violent offenders |
Finnish drug crime jurisprudence balances strict punishment for trafficking and organized operations with rehabilitative measures for personal use, while adapting to emerging drug trends like online sales and synthetic substances.
RELATED Blog
0 comments