Distribution Of Child Sexual Abuse Material
Legal Framework: Distribution of Child Sexual Abuse Material in Finland
In Finland, distribution of child sexual abuse material is criminalized under the Criminal Code (Rikoslaki):
Sexual Exploitation of a Child (Rikoslaki 20:10)
It is illegal to produce, distribute, or possess sexual material depicting a child (under 18).
Even digital images, videos, or online sharing count.
Aggravating Factors (Rikoslaki 21:5, 21:6)
Using force, threats, or involving multiple children may increase penalties.
Professional positions or abuse of trust (e.g., teachers, caretakers) also aggravate sentences.
Penalties
Possession: Typically fines or imprisonment up to 1 year.
Distribution/Production: Prison terms of 1–6 years depending on severity, with aggravating factors increasing sentences.
Finnish Cases on Distribution of CSAM
1. KKO 2017:14 – Online Distribution of Images
Facts: A man shared images of child sexual abuse via a private chat group online. The images involved multiple victims under 16.
Issue: Does sharing images in a private online group constitute distribution, even without financial gain?
Court Reasoning: Supreme Court emphasized that any transfer, sharing, or making accessible qualifies as distribution, regardless of profit motive.
Outcome: Conviction for distribution of child sexual abuse material; sentenced to 2 years imprisonment.
Significance: Clarified that online sharing, even in private circles, counts as distribution.
2. HO 2015:7 – Peer-to-Peer File Sharing
Facts: A university student shared CSAM via a peer-to-peer network for personal collection purposes.
Issue: Is sharing for private collection a criminal offense?
Court Reasoning: Courts held that distribution does not require intent to sell; making material accessible to others is enough. Peer-to-peer sharing is sufficient for criminal liability.
Outcome: Conviction; sentenced to 1 year imprisonment.
Significance: Established liability for digital file sharing networks, even when no direct financial or coercive gain occurs.
3. KKO 2019:6 – Aggravated Distribution with Multiple Victims
Facts: An individual distributed CSAM depicting several children under 15 through online forums.
Issue: How do multiple victims affect sentencing?
Court Reasoning: Supreme Court emphasized aggravating factors: number of victims, repeated acts, and potential for public dissemination.
Outcome: Conviction for aggravated distribution of CSAM; sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.
Significance: Highlights the aggravating role of multiple victims in sentencing.
4. HO 2013:15 – Teacher Sharing Material
Facts: A secondary school teacher was found to have shared CSAM images with colleagues via private messaging.
Issue: Does professional position aggravate the offense?
Court Reasoning: Courts considered abuse of trust and authority, which worsens the offense severity, even if the sharing was consensual among adults.
Outcome: Convicted for aggravated distribution; sentenced to 2 years imprisonment.
Significance: Professional positions that exploit authority increase penalties under Finnish law.
5. KKO 2016:32 – Possession and Distribution via Social Media
Facts: A man possessed and shared CSAM images through a social media group with strangers.
Issue: Whether sharing within a closed online group counts as distribution.
Court Reasoning: Court held that any act that enables access by others constitutes distribution, regardless of the group’s size or privacy settings.
Outcome: Conviction; 2 years imprisonment.
Significance: Clarifies that online “closed” groups do not exempt one from liability.
6. HO 2018:22 – Distribution Involving Minors’ Material Abroad
Facts: A Finnish man shared CSAM originating from another country via encrypted messaging apps.
Issue: Does international origin of material affect Finnish criminal jurisdiction?
Court Reasoning: Finnish law applies if the person distributes or possesses the material within Finland, regardless of its origin. Cross-border material does not exempt from liability.
Outcome: Conviction; 2 years 6 months imprisonment.
Significance: Finnish courts assert jurisdiction over domestic distributors, even for foreign material.
7. KKO 2020:10 – Large-Scale Distribution Ring
Facts: Police dismantled a network distributing CSAM among dozens of individuals. One member was charged for distributing hundreds of images.
Issue: How do scale and organized networks affect sentencing?
Court Reasoning: Court emphasized organized distribution networks as aggravating, leading to higher sentences. Large-scale operation indicates higher culpability.
Outcome: Conviction for aggravated distribution; sentenced to 4 years imprisonment.
Significance: Large-scale or organized dissemination receives significantly heavier penalties.
Key Legal Principles from These Cases
Distribution includes any act that makes CSAM accessible: private chat, file sharing, social media, or messaging apps.
Profit motive is not necessary: sharing for personal interest is criminal.
Aggravating factors: multiple victims, minors under 15, organized networks, professional authority, repeated acts.
Possession can be prosecuted, but distribution carries heavier penalties.
Jurisdiction: Finnish law applies to domestic possession/distribution even if material originates abroad.
Digital environments are treated seriously; online sharing, even in private groups, is illegal.
RELATED Blog
0 comments