Propaganda Offences In Finland
In Finland, propaganda offences generally relate to criminal acts of promoting hatred, violence, or discrimination, particularly on the basis of race, nationality, religion, or sexual orientation. Finnish law balances freedom of expression with protection against hate speech and extremist propaganda.
Legal Framework:
Criminal Code of Finland (39/1889, amended 2020):
Chapter 11 – Offences Against Public Order includes:
Section 10 – Aggravated public incitement against a group
– Making statements that incite hatred, violence, or discrimination against a population group.
Section 11 – Distribution of propaganda materials
– Producing, possessing, or distributing materials that promote racial or ethnic hatred.
International Obligations:
Finland is a party to European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which influence interpretation of hate speech and propaganda offences.
Scope of Offences:
Written, spoken, or digital content can be considered propaganda if it incites hatred or violence.
Political speech is protected unless it crosses the line into direct incitement of harm.
Key Finnish Cases on Propaganda Offences
1. MV-Lehti / Ilja Janitskin Case (2017–2019)
Facts:
MV-Lehti, a Finnish website, published articles spreading xenophobic and anti-immigrant propaganda, including false claims about refugees and minorities.
Ilja Janitskin, editor-in-chief, was accused of inciting hatred against a population group.
Court Proceedings:
Helsinki District Court prosecuted Janitskin for aggravated propaganda offences and defamation.
Outcome:
Convicted of aggravated incitement against a group and aggravated defamation.
Sentenced to 2 years imprisonment and ordered to pay damages.
Significance:
Landmark case demonstrating that online media can be criminally liable for propaganda.
Shows courts focus on content promoting hatred, not merely controversial opinions.
2. Nordfront Finland / Neo-Nazi Group Case (2018)
Facts:
Members of the neo-Nazi organization Nordfront distributed leaflets and posted online content promoting racial superiority and anti-immigrant sentiment.
Court Proceedings:
Charged under Section 10, Chapter 11 of the Criminal Code for public incitement to racial hatred.
Outcome:
Several members convicted; received fines and suspended sentences.
Distribution of printed and digital propaganda materials formed the basis of the conviction.
Significance:
Finnish law covers both offline and online propaganda, emphasizing public access to materials.
Reinforces that organized extremist groups are prosecutable under criminal law.
3. Rovaniemi Mosque Case (2016)
Facts:
An individual circulated flyers claiming that Muslims intended to “take over Finland,” promoting fear and hostility against religious groups.
Court Proceedings:
Charged with aggravated public incitement against a group.
Defense argued freedom of speech and political commentary.
Outcome:
Convicted; received 6 months suspended imprisonment.
Court emphasized the clear link between the statements and potential societal harm.
Significance:
Demonstrates that propaganda offences can target religious hatred, not just racial or ethnic groups.
Court balance between freedom of expression and protection of minorities.
4. Facebook Hate Speech Case / Anonymous User (2015)
Facts:
An individual posted multiple anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim comments on social media, including calls for exclusion from Finnish society.
Court Proceedings:
Prosecuted for public incitement against a group.
Outcome:
Convicted; received conditional imprisonment and community service.
Digital posts were considered equivalent to public distribution of propaganda.
Significance:
Marks one of the early Finnish cases on online hate speech prosecution.
Shows that anonymity online does not exempt individuals from criminal liability.
5. Kotka Rally Case / Anti-Immigrant Speech (2014)
Facts:
At a public rally, organizers distributed flyers claiming that immigrants were responsible for crime and social problems in Finland.
Court Proceedings:
Prosecuted for incitement to hatred against a population group.
Outcome:
Convicted; fined.
Court emphasized that public rallies amplifying extremist messages constitute propaganda offences.
Significance:
Reinforces that public demonstrations promoting hatred can be criminally sanctioned.
6. Kankaanpää Case / Holocaust Denial (2013)
Facts:
Individual posted online content denying the Holocaust and promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Court Proceedings:
Prosecuted under incitement against a group and dissemination of propaganda materials.
Outcome:
Convicted; received fines and suspended sentence.
Significance:
Shows Finnish courts prosecute historical denialism when it targets a protected group.
Aligns with European standards against Holocaust denial as hate propaganda.
Analysis of Finnish Propaganda Offences
Types of Content Prosecuted
Written articles, leaflets, online posts, speeches, and rallies.
Includes ethnic, racial, religious, and sometimes sexual orientation-based hatred.
Legal Threshold
Court considers whether content incites hatred, discrimination, or violence, not merely offensive opinion.
Freedom of expression is respected, but criminal law applies when public harm is foreseeable.
Digital Platforms
Online content, including social media, is fully covered by Finnish law.
Anonymity or deletion of content does not prevent prosecution.
Penalties
Fines, suspended sentences, imprisonment (often 6 months to 2 years for aggravated cases).
Damage compensation for defamed or targeted individuals or groups.
Role of Prosecutors
Finnish prosecutors actively pursue cases where extremist material is publicly accessible.
Collaboration with police and digital forensic experts is common in online cases.
Conclusion
Propaganda offences in Finland are serious criminal acts targeting the safety and dignity of population groups. Key points from the cases:
Online and offline materials are treated equally under the law.
Freedom of expression is protected, but public incitement to hatred crosses the legal threshold.
Courts have consistently prosecuted extremist groups, social media users, and public speakers.
Penalties range from fines and suspended sentences to imprisonment, depending on the gravity and reach of propaganda.
Finnish jurisprudence demonstrates a balanced approach: it safeguards democracy and minority rights while respecting free speech within legal limits.
RELATED Blog
0 comments