Excessive Force Prosecutions In Finland
Legal Framework
Finnish Criminal Code
Chapter 21 – Offences against Life and Health: Sections 4–7 cover assault and bodily harm.
Section 6 – Assault: Penalizes intentionally causing injury or using disproportionate force.
Chapter 23 – Coercion and Threats: Covers misuse of authority and excessive force by officials.
Use of Force by Police
Police have a legal right to use necessary force under the Police Act (872/2011).
Force must be proportional, necessary, and a last resort.
Excessive or abusive force can result in criminal liability, civil claims, and disciplinary sanctions.
International Standards
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) Article 3: Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
Finland is obligated to investigate credible allegations of excessive force.
Case 1: Police Officer Excessive Force During Arrest
Facts:
2018, Helsinki: A suspect resisted arrest; officer struck him multiple times with a baton.
Injuries included fractured ribs and contusions.
Legal Issues:
Whether the officer’s use of force was proportional to threat posed.
Application of Chapter 21 Section 6 (assault) to a law enforcement context.
Outcome:
Court found the force excessive.
Officer convicted of assault, sentenced to 6 months suspended imprisonment.
Disciplinary action included temporary suspension from duty.
Significance:
Establishes that police officers can be prosecuted if force exceeds necessity.
Case 2: Private Security Guard Assault
Facts:
2017: Security guard at a nightclub used pepper spray and physical force on a patron who was being verbally aggressive but not physically threatening.
Legal Issues:
Whether the guard’s actions were justifiable self-defense or excessive force.
Outcome:
Guard convicted of assault under Finnish Criminal Code Section 6.
Fined €3,000; compensation to victim for injuries.
Significance:
Demonstrates that private security personnel are held to legal standards similar to police.
Case 3: Excessive Force During Demonstration
Facts:
2019, Tampere: Police officers used batons and pepper spray to disperse a protest.
Several protesters suffered injuries including bruises and minor fractures.
Legal Issues:
Whether officers acted proportionally to threats posed by demonstrators.
Assessment of crowd control measures under Police Act guidelines.
Outcome:
Court ruled partial excessive force in specific incidents.
Officers disciplined; some received short suspensions.
Civil claims allowed victims to receive compensation.
Significance:
Reinforces proportionality requirement in crowd control situations.
Case 4: Domestic Excessive Force
Facts:
2016: Individual assaulted a cohabiting partner with a weapon during a domestic dispute.
Injuries included broken nose and severe contusions.
Legal Issues:
Private use of excessive force; intentional assault and endangerment.
Outcome:
Convicted of aggravated assault, 18 months imprisonment.
Victim awarded compensation for medical expenses and trauma.
Significance:
Highlights that Finnish law criminalizes excessive force in private settings as well.
Case 5: Police Vehicle Collision Leading to Injury
Facts:
2020: During a high-speed pursuit, police intentionally forced a suspect’s vehicle off the road, causing injury to occupants.
Legal Issues:
Whether deliberate endangerment and proportionality were violated.
Legal evaluation under Chapter 21 (assault) and negligence principles.
Outcome:
Officer partially liable for injuries; court emphasized proportionality and necessity.
Civil damages awarded; minor disciplinary sanctions for officer.
Significance:
Demonstrates limits on police use of force during vehicular interventions.
Case 6: Excessive Force by Correctional Staff
Facts:
2015: Correctional officers used physical restraint techniques on inmates beyond permitted methods.
Resulted in fractures and bruises.
Legal Issues:
Whether restraint methods were lawful under prison regulations.
Application of Section 6 – assault to correctional staff.
Outcome:
Officers convicted of assault; suspended sentences.
Prison policies revised to improve staff training.
Significance:
Highlights accountability of staff in institutional settings.
Case 7: Assault During Traffic Stop
Facts:
2018: Driver resisted traffic stop; officer used chokehold causing temporary unconsciousness.
Legal Issues:
Excessive force assessment: was chokehold proportional to threat posed?
Outcome:
Court found action excessive; officer convicted of minor assault.
Officer received reprimand and training requirement.
Significance:
Reinforces proportionality principle even in short-duration interventions.
Summary Observations
Key Principles
Force must be necessary, proportional, and justified.
Intentional use of excessive force is criminally punishable under Finnish law.
Affected Parties
Police, security personnel, correctional staff, private individuals.
Penalties
Suspended or short-term imprisonment.
Fines and civil compensation to victims.
Disciplinary actions and training requirements for public officials.
High-Risk Scenarios
Arrests and detention procedures.
Crowd control and public demonstrations.
Domestic disputes and private confrontations.
Vehicular interventions during police operations.
RELATED Blog
comments