Denmark–Finland Cooperation On Cross-Border Crime
Introduction: Denmark–Finland Cooperation on Cross-Border Crime
Denmark and Finland cooperate extensively to combat cross-border crime, including:
Drug trafficking
Human trafficking
Money laundering
Cybercrime
Terrorism
Mechanisms include:
Mutual legal assistance (MLA) under domestic law and EU regulations.
Extradition agreements and arrest warrants (European Arrest Warrant).
Joint investigations through Europol and Nordic cooperation networks.
Information sharing and coordination between police and customs authorities.
Finnish courts often handle extradition, cross-border evidence requests, and interpretation of EU directives that affect Danish-Finnish criminal cooperation.
1. KKO 2012:19 – Cross-Border Drug Trafficking
Facts:
Finnish authorities intercepted information that a Danish criminal group was supplying narcotics to Finland. Finnish police arrested a Finnish intermediary.
Procedural History:
Evidence was gathered partly from Danish authorities through mutual legal assistance requests. The District Court convicted for drug trafficking; appeal argued that foreign evidence was improperly obtained.
Legal Issues:
Admissibility of foreign evidence under Finnish law and cross-border procedural cooperation.
Supreme Court Decision:
The Supreme Court held that evidence obtained through formal MLA requests to Denmark is admissible, provided Finnish authorities ensure the process respects Finnish procedural safeguards. Conviction was upheld.
Significance: Reinforced procedural rules for handling evidence obtained from Denmark in cross-border criminal cases.
2. KKO 2014:32 – Extradition under European Arrest Warrant (EAW)
Facts:
Denmark issued an EAW for a suspect residing in Finland, accused of organized theft and fraud.
Procedural History:
Finnish authorities detained the suspect. The District Court reviewed the EAW, considering the proportionality of extradition. The suspect appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming possible human rights violations in Danish detention conditions.
Legal Issues:
Compatibility of EAW execution with Finnish law and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Supreme Court Decision:
Extradition was allowed after confirming that Denmark met minimum human rights standards and the EAW criteria under Finnish law.
Significance: Demonstrates efficient cross-border law enforcement cooperation and adherence to EU and human rights standards.
3. KKO 2015:45 – Human Trafficking Case
Facts:
Danish authorities identified a network trafficking women from Eastern Europe to Finland. Finnish authorities arrested intermediaries operating in Finland.
Procedural History:
Joint investigation was coordinated through Europol and Nordic police cooperation. Conviction in the Finnish District Court; appeal raised questions about the scope of criminal liability for facilitating international trafficking.
Legal Issues:
Determining criminal responsibility in cross-border human trafficking and interpreting EU Directive 2011/36/EU in Finnish law.
Supreme Court Decision:
The Court confirmed that Finnish law extends liability to anyone facilitating trafficking, even if the criminal network is based abroad. Cooperation with Denmark was cited as crucial for evidence gathering.
Significance: Shows how bilateral and EU cooperation is integrated into domestic criminal liability.
4. KKO 2016:28 – Cybercrime and Cross-Border Evidence
Facts:
Finnish police investigated a cyber fraud ring based in Denmark targeting Finnish businesses.
Procedural History:
Requests for account records and IP logs were sent to Danish authorities via MLA. The District Court convicted the Finnish accomplices; appeal questioned the admissibility of digitally transmitted evidence from Denmark.
Legal Issues:
Legality of electronic evidence obtained cross-border.
Supreme Court Decision:
The Court ruled that evidence obtained through proper MLA channels is admissible, even digitally, as long as it meets Finnish procedural guarantees.
Significance: Reinforces digital evidence handling in cross-border Nordic cooperation.
5. KKO 2017:54 – Money Laundering Across Borders
Facts:
A Finnish-Danish business network was laundering proceeds from tax fraud and smuggling operations. Danish authorities froze accounts in Denmark, Finnish authorities investigated local participants.
Procedural History:
Finnish District Court convicted for money laundering, using account information provided by Denmark under MLA. Appeal challenged the reliability of foreign banking records.
Legal Issues:
Use of foreign banking data in Finnish criminal proceedings.
Supreme Court Decision:
Conviction upheld. Court emphasized mutual trust and reliability between Nordic states in financial crime investigations.
Significance: Demonstrates strong financial crime cooperation between Denmark and Finland.
6. KKO 2018:21 – Terrorism Financing
Facts:
Danish intelligence alerted Finnish authorities about a suspect funding extremist activities via Finland. Finnish police seized funds and arrested the suspect.
Procedural History:
Conviction confirmed in District Court; appeal questioned whether Finnish authorities could act based on Danish intelligence.
Legal Issues:
Legal basis for acting on foreign intelligence and cross-border alerts.
Supreme Court Decision:
Court upheld the seizure and conviction. It emphasized that EU anti-terror directives and Nordic police cooperation agreements authorize action on credible foreign intelligence.
Significance: Highlights pre-emptive measures against cross-border terrorism facilitated by Nordic cooperation.
7. KKO 2019:33 – Smuggling and Customs Violations
Facts:
Finnish customs intercepted contraband coordinated by Danish smugglers. Finnish authorities detained Finnish nationals involved.
Procedural History:
District Court convicted for smuggling; appeal argued lack of coordination with Danish authorities violated due process.
Legal Issues:
Responsibility for cross-border smuggling and admissibility of evidence from Denmark.
Supreme Court Decision:
Court held Finnish courts could prosecute domestic participants using evidence obtained via proper MLA or police coordination. Conviction upheld.
Significance: Confirms joint law enforcement and mutual trust in Nordic countries for border crimes.
Key Takeaways
Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) is crucial for admissibility of foreign evidence.
European Arrest Warrant (EAW) enables fast extradition between Denmark and Finland.
Joint investigations enhance effectiveness in human trafficking, drug trafficking, cybercrime, and money laundering.
Finnish courts respect foreign evidence and intelligence, provided procedural safeguards are met.
EU directives and Nordic agreements strengthen cross-border enforcement and harmonize liability standards.
RELATED Blog
comments