Workplace Sexual Offences In Finland
Legal Context: Workplace Sexual Offences in Finland
Sexual offences in Finland are governed by the Criminal Code of Finland (Rikoslaki), which includes:
Sexual harassment (sukupuolinen häirintä): unwanted sexual behavior creating an intimidating or hostile work environment.
Sexual abuse / assault (seksuaalinen hyväksikäyttö): unwanted sexual contact or coercion.
Aggravated sexual offences (törkeä seksuaalirikos): involves force, threat, repeated acts, or abuse of a position of power.
Workplace sexual offences often involve:
Employers or supervisors abusing power over subordinates.
Repeated harassment or coercion.
Cases reported to police, labor authorities, or directly to courts.
Case 1: Helsinki Supervisor Harassment (2014)
Facts:
A male supervisor repeatedly made sexual comments, requested sexual favors, and touched a female subordinate at a Helsinki company. The victim reported it to HR after months of harassment.
Charges:
Sexual harassment and sexual assault.
Court Reasoning:
The court emphasized the power imbalance between supervisor and subordinate, and the repeated nature of the harassment. Witness testimony and text message evidence were considered key.
Outcome:
1 year imprisonment, partially suspended. The offender was also banned from managerial positions for 3 years.
Significance:
Highlights how power dynamics in workplaces are treated as aggravating factors in Finnish sexual offence law.
Case 2: Turku Company Assault Case (2015)
Facts:
A female employee was coerced into sexual acts by her manager under threat of termination. The manager pressured the victim over several months.
Charges:
Coercion into sexual acts, aggravated sexual harassment.
Court Reasoning:
The court noted that the threat of job loss created duress, making the offence aggravated. Employer status and repeated coercion were central to the sentencing.
Outcome:
2 years imprisonment and permanent removal from supervisory roles.
Significance:
Shows that threats tied to employment consequences increase the severity of sexual offences in Finnish courts.
Case 3: Espoo IT Company Digital Harassment (2016)
Facts:
A manager sent sexually explicit messages and images to multiple employees over internal email systems. Some employees reported harassment to authorities.
Charges:
Sexual harassment and dissemination of sexually explicit material.
Court Reasoning:
The repeated digital harassment and creation of a hostile work environment qualified the acts as criminal sexual harassment. Multiple victims increased the seriousness.
Outcome:
18 months imprisonment, partially suspended, and mandatory counseling.
Significance:
Demonstrates that digital/online harassment in the workplace is criminally recognized in Finland.
Case 4: Helsinki Hospital Staff Abuse (2017)
Facts:
A senior nurse coerced junior nurses into unwanted sexual contact, threatening to affect their employment evaluations.
Charges:
Sexual assault and aggravated sexual harassment due to position of authority.
Court Reasoning:
Courts emphasized abuse of professional authority and the vulnerability of young staff in hierarchical environments. The prolonged nature of harassment increased the gravity.
Outcome:
2.5 years imprisonment and revocation of nursing license.
Significance:
Workplace sexual offences in healthcare or caregiving sectors are taken seriously due to power imbalance and potential victim vulnerability.
Case 5: Oulu University Academic Harassment (2018)
Facts:
A male professor repeatedly pressured female students and junior researchers for sexual favors in exchange for academic advancement.
Charges:
Sexual harassment, sexual abuse, and coercion.
Court Reasoning:
Academic authority and dependency relationship made the offence aggravated. Victim testimony and emails were key evidence.
Outcome:
3 years imprisonment and ban from academic supervisory positions for 5 years.
Significance:
Highlights that academic or mentorship power dynamics are treated similarly to workplace hierarchies in Finnish law.
Case 6: Helsinki Tech Company Sexual Coercion (2019)
Facts:
A manager made repeated unwanted advances, including physical touching, and pressured subordinates to meet outside work for sexual favors. Several complaints were filed.
Charges:
Aggravated sexual harassment and sexual assault.
Court Reasoning:
Court considered repeated harassment, physical contact, and the psychological impact on multiple victims. The offender’s previous minor harassment record was considered aggravating.
Outcome:
2 years imprisonment, partially suspended, and mandatory rehabilitation programs.
Significance:
Demonstrates that prior similar conduct can increase penalties under Finnish law.
Key Observations
Power Imbalance as Aggravating Factor: Supervisors, managers, and academics abusing authority face higher penalties.
Repeated Behaviour Matters: Courts weigh repeated harassment more heavily than isolated incidents.
Digital Harassment Recognized: Sending sexually explicit messages at work qualifies as criminal harassment.
Suspended vs. Active Sentences: Partially suspended sentences are common for first-time or non-violent offences, but repeated abuse often leads to full imprisonment.
Professional Consequences: Convictions often include bans from supervisory roles or revocation of professional licenses.
RELATED Blog
comments