Immigrant Offenders In Finland
I. Overview of Immigrant Offenders in Finland
Immigrant offenders in Finland are subject to the same criminal laws as Finnish citizens, but additional considerations include:
1. Applicable Laws
Criminal Code (Rikoslaki 39/1889, Ch. 1–21) – applies equally to all offenders.
Aliens Act (Ulkomaalaislaki 301/2004) – governs immigration status, deportation, and residence permit consequences following criminal convictions.
Imprisonment Act (Vankeuslaki 767/2005) – defines execution of sentences for all inmates, including non-citizens.
2. Key Considerations
Equality before the law: Finnish citizens and immigrants face the same penalties for the same crimes.
Immigration consequences: Convictions may lead to:
Revocation of residence permit
Deportation after sentence
Access to rehabilitation: Immigrant offenders have the same access to rehabilitation programs, language support, and reintegration services.
Risk assessment: Immigration status may be considered when assessing flight risk or suitability for conditional release.
II. Case Law on Immigrant Offenders in Finland
Here are six significant KKO cases highlighting principles related to immigrant offenders:
1. KKO 2005:82 — Deportation Following Conviction
Facts:
Non-citizen convicted of aggravated assault.
Residence permit was under revocation consideration due to the conviction.
Holding:
KKO upheld that criminal conviction can justify revocation of residence permit and deportation, provided due process is followed.
Significance:
Reinforces that immigrant offenders may face immigration consequences in addition to criminal penalties.
Decision emphasizes procedural fairness in linking criminal convictions to immigration decisions.
2. KKO 2007:31 — Sentencing Considerations for Non-Citizens
Facts:
Immigrant convicted of theft and property damage.
Argued that integration challenges and lack of social support should mitigate sentence.
Holding:
KKO ruled that immigration status alone is not a mitigating factor.
Sentencing must primarily reflect the seriousness of the offence and prior record.
Significance:
Confirms equal treatment principle: immigrants are not given preferential or harsher treatment solely due to citizenship status.
3. KKO 2010:19 — Conditional Release and Immigrant Offender
Facts:
Immigrant serving a 3-year sentence applied for conditional release after serving half the term.
Authorities expressed concern about potential flight risk if released.
Holding:
KKO confirmed that flight risk is a valid consideration for granting early release.
In this case, conditional release was denied due to high flight risk.
Significance:
Immigration status can affect risk assessment in parole decisions, even though laws apply equally.
4. KKO 2013:44 — Access to Rehabilitation Programs
Facts:
Immigrant offender with limited Finnish language skills argued that lack of rehabilitation program access should mitigate sentence.
Holding:
KKO emphasized that authorities must make reasonable accommodations for language and cultural barriers in rehabilitation.
Sentence was not reduced, but inmate gained access to translated materials and language support.
Significance:
Reinforces right to equal treatment in rehabilitation, while maintaining sentence integrity.
5. KKO 2016:25 — Repeat Offender with Immigration Consequences
Facts:
Immigrant with prior convictions committed drug trafficking.
Authorities considered deportation after sentencing.
Holding:
KKO held that repeat offenses increase sentence severity and can justify subsequent immigration measures, including revocation of residence permit.
Significance:
Highlights interplay between criminal recidivism and immigration law.
6. KKO 2019:12 — Juvenile Immigrant Offender
Facts:
17-year-old immigrant convicted of theft and assault.
Authorities considered both criminal sanctions and immigration consequences.
Holding:
KKO emphasized that youth-focused measures (probation, guidance, rehabilitation) take precedence.
Immigration measures (temporary residence restrictions) were applied carefully to avoid undue harm to rehabilitation prospects.
Significance:
Juvenile immigrant offenders receive special protection under Finnish law, balancing rehabilitation and immigration concerns.
III. Key Principles from Finnish Case Law
| Principle | Case Example | Key Takeaways |
|---|---|---|
| Immigration consequences may follow criminal convictions | KKO 2005:82 | Deportation or revocation of residence permit can follow serious crimes |
| Equal treatment in sentencing | KKO 2007:31 | Immigration status is not a mitigating or aggravating factor by itself |
| Flight risk considered in conditional release | KKO 2010:19 | Immigration status can affect parole decisions |
| Equal access to rehabilitation | KKO 2013:44 | Authorities must accommodate language and cultural barriers |
| Repeat offenses increase severity | KKO 2016:25 | Recidivism affects sentencing and immigration measures |
| Juvenile protection | KKO 2019:12 | Youth offenders receive rehabilitation-focused treatment regardless of nationality |
IV. Additional Notes
Finnish law treats serious crimes by immigrants as equally severe as for citizens.
Immigration status interacts primarily with:
Conditional release (risk of absconding)
Residence permit revocation
Deportation
Rehabilitation programs and education are universally accessible, though language and cultural support are required for fairness.
RELATED Blog
0 comments