Restorative Justice Programmes In Finnish Criminal Law
1. Overview of Restorative Justice in Finland
Restorative justice (RJ) is an approach focused on repairing harm caused by crime rather than only punishing the offender. Finland has been one of the early adopters of formalized restorative justice practices within its criminal justice system.
Key Features of Finnish Restorative Justice
Victim-Offender Mediation (VOM):
Facilitated meetings between the victim and offender to discuss harm and reparation.
Mediators are trained professionals or volunteers from local mediation services.
Voluntary Participation:
Participation is always voluntary for both victims and offenders.
Integration into Criminal Procedure:
Mediations can be offered before, during, or after court proceedings.
Courts may consider outcomes of mediation when deciding sentences.
Focus Areas:
Minor and medium-level crimes (assault, theft, property damage).
Juvenile and young adult offenders.
Legal Basis
Criminal Code of Finland (Rikoslaki 39/1889, Chapter 2 & 6) – provides framework for sentencing and diversion.
Victim-Offender Mediation Act (2006) – formalizes mediation and confidentiality rules.
Encourages restorative measures alongside traditional penalties, including fines, compensation, and probation.
2. Objectives of Restorative Justice Programmes
Repair harm to victims
Victims receive explanations, apologies, and compensation directly from offenders.
Reduce reoffending
Offenders reflect on the consequences of their actions.
Promote community safety and involvement
Encourages dialogue and social reintegration.
Supplement traditional sanctions
Courts may reduce sentences if mediation is successful.
3. Case Law Illustrating Restorative Justice in Finland
Here are six notable Finnish cases, highlighting the practical application of RJ.
CASE 1: Juvenile Theft Mediation – Helsinki District Court, 2010
Background:
A 16-year-old shoplifter was caught stealing electronics. The victim requested restitution and wanted to avoid a criminal record for the youth.
Restorative Justice Process:
Victim-offender mediation was arranged through Helsinki Mediation Service.
The offender admitted guilt and discussed the emotional impact on the victim.
Agreed on financial compensation and community service.
Outcome:
Court reduced sentence to community service instead of a youth detention order.
Victim expressed satisfaction with the mediation outcome.
Importance:
Demonstrates mediation’s role in juvenile crime, preventing early criminal records and fostering responsibility.
CASE 2: Assault Mediation – Turku District Court, 2012
Background:
A bar fight resulted in minor assault injuries. The offender faced potential fines and imprisonment.
Restorative Justice Process:
Mediation meeting facilitated dialogue between victim and offender.
Offender offered a formal apology and covered medical expenses.
Outcome:
Court considered mediation in sentencing, resulting in a reduced fine and probation.
Victim reported feeling acknowledged and safe post-process.
Importance:
Shows RJ as an alternative or complement to punitive sanctions for violent crime of minor severity.
CASE 3: Juvenile Vandalism – Oulu District Court, 2013
Background:
Teenagers vandalized a school property. Property damage estimated at €3,000.
Restorative Justice Process:
Mediation included school authorities, parents, and offenders.
Offenders agreed to repair damages and write reflection essays on the consequences of their actions.
Outcome:
Court dismissed custodial sentence.
Offenders completed mediation obligations successfully.
Importance:
Emphasizes community involvement and educational outcomes as part of RJ.
CASE 4: Domestic Violence Mediation – Tampere District Court, 2015
Background:
A partner physically assaulted their spouse. While criminal prosecution proceeded, the victim requested mediation for reconciliation and harm discussion.
Restorative Justice Process:
Meetings facilitated by trained mediators.
Discussions focused on harm, accountability, and safety plans.
Outcome:
Offender received conditional sentence, counseling mandated.
Victim received personal satisfaction and clarification of boundaries.
Importance:
RJ can complement judicial process in sensitive domestic cases, enhancing victim safety and offender accountability.
CASE 5: Burglary and Property Damage – Espoo District Court, 2016
Background:
Offender broke into a private home, stealing valuables worth €5,000.
Restorative Justice Process:
Mediation arranged before sentencing.
Offender admitted guilt, returned stolen property, and offered compensation.
Victim appreciated direct accountability and closure.
Outcome:
Court sentenced offender to shortened imprisonment plus restitution, taking mediation results into account.
Importance:
Demonstrates RJ’s influence on sentencing, incentivizing offenders to participate actively in repairing harm.
CASE 6: Youth Cyberbullying – Lahti District Court, 2018
Background:
Teenagers circulated private images of a peer online. Victim suffered emotional trauma and requested restorative measures.
Restorative Justice Process:
Mediation involved victim, offenders, and parents.
Offenders apologized, agreed to delete materials, and attend counseling on digital ethics.
Outcome:
Court imposed probation and community service, recognizing mediation.
Victim reported reduced emotional stress and sense of justice.
Importance:
RJ adapts to modern digital crimes, addressing harm beyond financial or physical damage.
4. Key Observations from Finnish Case Law
Victim-Centric Approach
Victims participate actively, receiving explanations and compensation.
Juvenile Focus
RJ often applied to young offenders to prevent criminal records and reoffending.
Reduced Formal Sentencing
Courts often consider successful mediation to reduce fines, probation, or custodial sentences.
Community and Family Involvement
Enhances accountability and social reintegration.
Flexibility Across Crime Types
Applicable to theft, assault, domestic violence, property damage, and cybercrime.
5. Benefits of Restorative Justice in Finnish Criminal Law
| Benefit | Example |
|---|---|
| Reduces recidivism | Juvenile theft and vandalism cases |
| Enhances victim satisfaction | Assault mediation in Turku |
| Provides offender accountability | Domestic violence and burglary cases |
| Supports reintegration | Youth cyberbullying case |
| Complements judicial process | Financial restitution and conditional sentences |
Summary:
Finland’s restorative justice programmes illustrate a balanced system that prioritizes repairing harm, protecting victims, and rehabilitating offenders. Courts actively integrate mediation outcomes into sentencing, showing that RJ is not an alternative but a complement to traditional criminal justice.
RELATED Blog
comments