Trolling And Criminal Law In Finland
1. Legal Framework for Trolling in Finland
In Finland, trolling is not explicitly defined in law, but it can fall under several criminal offenses:
Criminal Code of Finland (Rikoslaki 39/1889):
Chapter 24 – Defamation (§24, §25): Insulting or defaming someone publicly online.
Chapter 38 – Threats (§7–8): Making threats of violence or harm.
Chapter 9 – Offenses Against Liberty (§9): Stalking (harassment).
Data Protection and Privacy:
Act on the Protection of Privacy in Electronic Communications (516/2004): Unauthorized publication of personal information.
Cybercrime:
Trolling that involves hacking, doxxing, or spreading false information may fall under cybercrime provisions.
Key Principle:
Finnish law focuses on the harm caused, rather than intent to troll. If trolling leads to harassment, threats, or defamation, it is criminally actionable.
2. Case: Anonymous Threats on Social Media (Helsinki District Court, 2017)
Background:
A man repeatedly posted threats against a public official on social media, including threatening language and harassment.
Legal Basis:
Finnish Criminal Code §7 (Threats) and §7–8 (Harassment).
Case Details:
The defendant claimed it was “just joking” online.
The court considered the frequency of messages, public visibility, and the impact on the victim.
Outcome:
Convicted of making threats and harassment. Sentenced to community service and probation.
Significance:
Established that online trolling can be treated the same as offline harassment if it causes fear or distress.
3. Case: Defamation via Facebook (Turku Court of Appeal, 2015)
Background:
A person posted derogatory statements about a colleague on Facebook, accusing them of unethical behavior.
Legal Basis:
Finnish Criminal Code §24 (Defamation) and §25 (Aggravated Defamation).
Case Details:
The court examined whether the statements were factual accusations or harmful opinions.
The victim provided evidence of emotional distress and reputational harm.
Outcome:
Conviction for defamation. Fine imposed, with public apology required.
Significance:
Confirmed that social media posts can constitute defamation and trolling is not protected as free expression if it harms reputation.
4. Case: Repeated Stalking Online (Espoo District Court, 2018)
Background:
A user repeatedly sent insulting messages and posted unwanted images of a former partner online.
Legal Basis:
Criminal Code §9 – Stalking / harassment.
Case Details:
Court analyzed the pattern of behavior and emotional impact on the victim.
The repeated, targeted nature distinguished this from a single online insult.
Outcome:
Convicted of stalking, sentenced to 6 months suspended imprisonment and mandated therapy.
Significance:
Shows that persistent trolling crosses into criminal harassment, even without physical interaction.
5. Case: Online Hate Speech (Helsinki Court of Appeal, 2019)
Background:
User posted racist and homophobic comments on a public forum.
Legal Basis:
Criminal Code §11–11a (Hate Speech / Aggravated Hate Speech).
Case Details:
Messages were accessible publicly and targeted specific minority groups.
Prosecution argued this incited hatred and threatened public order.
Outcome:
Convicted of aggravated hate speech, fined, and banned from posting on the forum for one year.
Significance:
Demonstrates that trolling motivated by hate can be prosecuted as a public order offense.
6. Case: Doxxing and Privacy Violation (Helsinki District Court, 2020)
Background:
An individual published the private address and phone number of a public figure online.
Legal Basis:
Criminal Code §38 (Harassment) and §24a (Invasion of Privacy).
Act on the Protection of Privacy in Electronic Communications.
Case Details:
Victim received threatening messages and feared for safety.
Court considered the intent and consequences of the doxxing.
Outcome:
Conviction for harassment and privacy violation, sentenced to community service and a fine.
Significance:
Shows that trolling that exposes private information is criminal if it endangers the victim.
7. Case: Threatening Messages to Journalists (Finland, 2016)
Background:
A journalist reporting on political issues received repeated online threats.
Legal Basis:
Criminal Code §7 (Threats) and §9 (Harassment).
Case Details:
Authorities investigated IP addresses and social media accounts.
Evidence showed deliberate targeting to intimidate and silence.
Outcome:
Perpetrator convicted of criminal harassment and threats, fined, and sentenced to probation.
Significance:
Reinforces that journalists are protected under trolling-related harassment laws, reflecting the importance of freedom of the press.
Key Observations from Finnish Trolling Prosecutions
Online Conduct = Offline Conduct:
Courts treat online harassment, threats, and defamation the same as physical actions.
Pattern Matters:
Repeated trolling, stalking, and doxxing are taken more seriously than isolated insults.
Public Officials and Journalists:
Special protection under law; trolling against public figures is criminal if it threatens safety or reputation.
Hate Speech and Discrimination:
Trolls targeting minorities can face charges for aggravated hate speech.
Consequences:
Convictions include fines, suspended imprisonment, community service, probation, and sometimes bans on online activity.
RELATED Blog
comments