Restorative Justice And Mediation Practices
Legal Framework for Restorative Justice in Finland
Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Act:
Finnish law encourages mediation (sovittelu) in criminal cases, especially for minor offenses and juvenile cases.
Victim-offender mediation is regulated under the Criminal Procedure Act (Rikoslaki / Oikeudenkäymiskaari, Sections 6 & 7).
The aim is to restore relationships, compensate victims, and reduce recidivism.
Restorative Justice Principles:
Focus on repairing harm rather than only punishing the offender.
Voluntary participation of both the victim and offender.
Mediation can lead to reduced sentences, conditional fines, or community service.
Widely used in juvenile justice but also applied to adult cases.
Mediation Providers:
Local municipalities, non-governmental organizations, and specially trained mediators conduct sessions.
Case 1: Juvenile Theft Mediation in Tampere (2016)
Facts: A 15-year-old stole electronics from a store. Police referred the case to mediation instead of proceeding directly to court.
Process:
Mediators met both the victim (store manager) and the juvenile.
Offender apologized, returned stolen goods, and agreed to community service.
Outcome:
The case was closed without a formal criminal conviction.
Court recognized the mediation agreement in its final decision.
Significance:
Demonstrated how mediation can avoid formal prosecution while addressing harm.
Highlighted the rehabilitative role of restorative justice for juveniles.
Case 2: Workplace Conflict Mediation – Helsinki (2018)
Facts: An employee intentionally damaged a colleague’s work files, causing financial loss to the company.
Legal Issue: Minor criminal damage could have led to prosecution.
Process:
Mediators brought both parties together.
Offender compensated the company and apologized.
Outcome:
Prosecutor suspended charges based on successful mediation.
Significance:
Showed that restorative practices are not limited to juvenile or minor crimes.
Compensation and acknowledgment of harm can replace traditional sanctions.
Case 3: Vandalism and School Mediation – Oulu (2017)
Facts: Two teenagers vandalized school property, spray-painting walls and breaking windows.
Process:
School authorities, victim (school), and offender attended mediation sessions.
Offenders agreed to clean up, repair damages, and attend counseling sessions.
Outcome:
No formal criminal record was issued.
Court supported mediation outcome as satisfying justice and repair.
Significance:
Reinforced the preventive and restorative role of mediation in youth crime.
Showed collaboration between educational institutions and legal authorities.
Case 4: Domestic Dispute Mediation – Espoo (2019)
Facts: A minor assault occurred between family members during a heated argument.
Process:
Police referred the case to restorative justice mediation.
Mediation involved family counseling and agreement on conflict resolution.
Outcome:
Court took mediation outcomes into account, imposing a minimal conditional fine instead of imprisonment.
Significance:
Illustrated use of mediation in family and domestic disputes.
Focused on repairing relationships rather than punishment.
Case 5: Traffic Accident Mediation – Turku (2020)
Facts: A minor traffic collision resulted in damage to another driver’s vehicle. The offender admitted responsibility.
Process:
Mediation allowed the offender and victim to negotiate compensation.
Offender agreed to pay repair costs and attend a driving safety course.
Outcome:
Prosecutor closed the case based on mediation agreement.
Significance:
Demonstrated the efficiency of mediation in resolving minor traffic crimes.
Reduced court workload while ensuring victim satisfaction.
Case 6: Cyberbullying and Restorative Justice – Helsinki (2021)
Facts: A teenager sent threatening messages to a peer online.
Process:
Mediators facilitated a session between the victim, offender, and parents.
Offender acknowledged harm, issued an apology, and participated in an educational workshop.
Outcome:
Criminal charges were not pursued; case resolved through restorative agreement.
Significance:
Showed the application of mediation in digital crimes.
Emphasized education and behavioral correction over punishment.
Key Takeaways from Finnish Restorative Justice Case Law
Voluntary Participation: Both victims and offenders must voluntarily consent.
Focus on Repairing Harm: Mediation prioritizes victim compensation, apology, and reconciliation.
Court Recognition: Mediated agreements can prevent criminal convictions or reduce penalties.
Applicability: Used in juvenile crimes, minor adult offenses, traffic violations, cybercrime, and domestic conflicts.
Preventive Function: Reduces recidivism by promoting offender accountability and social reintegration.
RELATED Blog
comments