Telecommunications regulation in Finland
📡 Part I: Telecommunications Regulation in Finland
🔷 1. Overview of the Legal Framework
Telecommunications in Finland is regulated to ensure:
Data protection and privacy
Consumer protection
Competitive markets
National security
📌 Key Legislation:
Act on Electronic Communications Services (917/2014)
Information Society Code (as amended)
Act on the Protection of Privacy in Electronic Communications (516/2004)
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU)
Communications Market Act (repealed, but historically important)
🔧 Regulatory Authorities:
Traficom (Finnish Transport and Communications Agency): Oversees licensing, spectrum, competition, and consumer rights.
Data Protection Ombudsman: Ensures privacy compliance.
Ministry of Transport and Communications: Drafts national policy and legislation.
🔷 2. Key Principles in Finnish Telecom Regulation
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Net neutrality | ISPs must treat all internet traffic equally. |
| User privacy | Communications confidentiality is constitutionally protected (Section 10 of the Constitution). |
| Service continuity | Operators must ensure reliable service provision. |
| Lawful surveillance | Permitted only under strict conditions and legal basis. |
| Data retention | Limited and must comply with privacy laws and ECJ case law. |
📚 Case Law on Telecommunications Regulation
1. KHO:2014:83 – Internet Blocking and Freedom of Expression
Facts:
An ISP blocked access to a website under police orders alleging distribution of illegal content. The site owner claimed violation of freedom of expression.
Holding:
The Supreme Administrative Court ruled the blocking order was lawful, as it was based on specific legal authorization and aimed at protecting children.
However, emphasized the need for procedural safeguards and transparency.
Importance:
Balanced freedom of expression (Section 12, Constitution) and protection of minors.
Confirmed legality of site blocking if proportionate and legally justified.
2. KHO:2008:84 – Data Retention and Subscriber Information
Facts:
Police requested subscriber data from an ISP without a court order. The ISP refused, citing privacy obligations.
Holding:
The Court held that subscriber information may be disclosed only under strict legal conditions.
Police must provide legal basis and necessity under the Act on Electronic Communications.
Importance:
Reaffirmed that privacy of communications is protected, and data access requires lawful grounds.
3. KHO:2019:26 – Antenna Mast Location Dispute
Facts:
A telecom company sought permission to install a new mobile antenna. The municipality and citizens opposed it on environmental and aesthetic grounds.
Holding:
The Court upheld the telecom company's right, noting that communications infrastructure development is of public interest.
Local objections must be balanced against network coverage obligations.
Importance:
Clarified the priority of public interest in telecom infrastructure, especially for rural access.
4. Traficom Decision 2022 – Net Neutrality Violation by ISP
Facts:
An ISP offered a mobile plan that zero-rated specific streaming services (e.g., Spotify, Netflix).
Outcome:
Traficom ruled this violated EU net neutrality rules.
Ordered ISP to stop discriminatory treatment of certain services.
Importance:
Enforced equal treatment of internet traffic, in line with EU Open Internet Regulation.
✅ Summary of Finnish Telecom Law Principles:
| Area | Legal Position |
|---|---|
| Internet censorship | Allowed in limited, legally justified cases |
| Privacy and data retention | Must comply with GDPR and strict national rules |
| Police access to data | Requires clear legal basis |
| Net neutrality | Enforced under EU law |
| Infrastructure development | Supported by public interest considerations |
🧾 Constitutionally Relevant Provisions:
Section 10 – Protection of private life, communications confidentiality
Section 12 – Freedom of expression
Section 21 – Right to fair procedure
🧿 Part II: Digital ID Systems and Legality in Finland
🔷 1. What Are Digital ID Systems?
Digital identification systems (Digital ID) enable citizens and residents to:
Prove identity online
Access public and private services securely
Sign documents electronically
In Finland, Digital ID is essential for:
Banking
E-health (Kanta.fi)
E-government portals (Suomi.fi)
Tax filing and social benefits
🔷 2. Legal Basis for Digital ID in Finland
Act on Strong Electronic Identification and Trust Services (617/2009)
EU eIDAS Regulation (EU 910/2014)
Data Protection Act (1050/2018)
GDPR
Constitution of Finland (especially Sections 6, 10, and 21)
📚 Key Legal Principles
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Voluntary use | Digital ID systems must not become a de facto requirement that excludes non-users. |
| Privacy by design | Systems must be built with data protection as a core feature. |
| Consent and transparency | Users must know how their data is used and must consent. |
| Access to services | Essential services must remain accessible to those without digital ID. |
📚 Case Law on Digital ID and Legality
1. Data Protection Ombudsman Decision – Use of Bank Credentials for e-ID (2021)
Facts:
Finnish banks dominate the strong electronic ID market. A complaint was filed that this limits equality and choice.
Findings:
The Ombudsman found the reliance on commercial e-IDs (banks) raised concerns about equality and market concentration.
Urged the state to develop a neutral, state-backed digital ID system.
Importance:
Reinforced the constitutional principle of equality (Section 6).
Promoted state responsibility in ensuring non-discriminatory digital access.
2. KHO:2013:67 – e-ID and Access to Public Health Services
Facts:
A patient was denied access to online health records due to lack of e-ID credentials.
Holding:
The Court found that denying essential services due to lack of digital ID could violate constitutional rights.
Ordered the health provider to offer alternative access methods.
Importance:
Affirmed that digital ID must not become a barrier to public services.
Linked digital infrastructure to constitutional rights of access and equality.
3. KHO:2020:95 – e-ID Misuse and Personal Data Violation
Facts:
A municipality used a digital ID-based login system that exposed sensitive personal data due to poor design.
Holding:
Court ruled it a violation of data protection obligations under GDPR.
Municipality fined and ordered to redesign system with proper safeguards.
Importance:
Reinforced data minimization and security by design in digital ID systems.
4. EOAK/2780/2021 – Accessibility Complaint: Elderly and Digital ID
Facts:
An elderly citizen filed a complaint with the Parliamentary Ombudsman about not being able to access pension services online due to lack of e-ID.
Ombudsman’s Decision:
Found that digital-only access could violate non-discrimination and accessibility rights.
Recommended hybrid service models and support for digitally excluded groups.
Importance:
Ensured inclusive digital transformation.
Linked digital policy to fundamental human rights.
✅ Summary of Digital ID Legal Concerns in Finland
| Legal Issue | Position |
|---|---|
| Mandatory use | Not allowed; alternatives must exist |
| Privacy protection | Strongly enforced under GDPR |
| Inclusion of elderly/disabled | Essential under equality principles |
| State vs private providers | State should ensure neutrality and accessibility |
| Data security | Must be ensured by design; breaches are punishable |
📌 Final Thoughts
✅ Telecom Regulation in Finland ensures:
Secure, private, and open communication
Strong protections under constitutional and EU law
Effective enforcement by independent regulators and courts
✅ Digital ID systems must:
Be voluntary, inclusive, and privacy-preserving
Not create digital exclusion
Align with constitutional values and GDPR
RELATED Blog
0 comments