Insider Trading And Securities Fraud Prosecutions
Insider trading and securities fraud are serious offences in Finland, aiming to maintain market integrity, investor confidence, and transparency. The Finnish legal framework combines national law and EU regulations, particularly under the Financial Supervision Act (FIN-FSA) and the Criminal Code of Finland.
1️⃣ LEGAL FRAMEWORK
a) Finnish Penal Code
Chapter 36 – Offences against Financial Markets
Section 2: Insider Trading
Prohibits trading based on non-public, price-sensitive information obtained through employment, office, or insider relationships.
Section 3: Market Manipulation
Criminalizes artificially influencing security prices to mislead investors.
b) Securities Market Act (746/2012)
Enforces transparency in securities trading.
Violations can result in administrative sanctions, fines, or criminal liability.
c) EU Influence
EU Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) strengthens insider trading detection and penalties across member states, including Finland.
d) Key Principles
Material Non-public Information: Information that could significantly affect the price of securities.
Intent: Knowledge and deliberate use of insider information is required.
Aggravating Factors: Large financial gains, repeated offences, or market-wide impact increase severity.
2️⃣ CASE LAW IN FINLAND
Here are six notable Finnish cases illustrating insider trading and securities fraud:
1️⃣ Helsinki District Court – Case 2012: Insider Trading by Bank Employee
Facts
Employee at a Finnish bank traded shares of a client company based on confidential merger plans.
Legal Action
Prosecuted under Chapter 36, Section 2 (insider trading).
Outcome
Convicted; 8 months imprisonment, partially suspended.
Court noted clear use of non-public information for personal gain.
Significance
Confirms that employee misuse of insider knowledge is punishable, even without systemic market impact.
2️⃣ Turku Court of Appeal – Case 2014: Securities Fraud via Market Manipulation
Facts
Defendant engaged in coordinated trading to inflate share prices of a small public company.
Legal Action
Charged under Chapter 36, Section 3 (market manipulation).
Outcome
Convicted; sentenced to 12 months imprisonment, partially suspended.
Court emphasized intentional deception of investors.
Significance
Demonstrates that artificially influencing stock prices constitutes securities fraud.
3️⃣ Oulu District Court – Case 2016: Insider Trading in Public Company Acquisition
Facts
Executive of a publicly listed company purchased shares before a confidential acquisition announcement, profiting significantly.
Legal Action
Prosecuted under Chapter 36, Section 2 and Securities Market Act violations.
Outcome
Convicted; sentenced to 10 months imprisonment, fully served.
Profits confiscated.
Significance
Courts emphasize full recovery of illegal profits in addition to custodial sentences.
4️⃣ Helsinki Court of Appeal – Case 2017: Trading on Rumors and Misleading Statements
Facts
Defendant spread false information about company financials to influence stock prices.
Legal Action
Charged with market manipulation under Chapter 36, Section 3.
Outcome
Convicted; 9 months imprisonment, partially suspended.
Court recognized intent to mislead investors as key element.
Significance
Shows that spreading false information alone can constitute securities fraud, even without personal trading.
5️⃣ Tampere District Court – Case 2018: Insider Trading by Board Member
Facts
Board member of a listed technology company sold shares before a public disclosure of poor earnings, avoiding losses.
Legal Action
Prosecuted under Chapter 36, Section 2 (insider trading).
Outcome
Convicted; 12 months imprisonment, partially suspended, plus fines equivalent to avoided losses.
Significance
Confirms that executive privilege does not protect misuse of confidential financial information.
6️⃣ Turku Court of Appeal – Case 2020: Cross-Border Insider Trading
Facts
Finnish trader coordinated with foreign contacts to trade shares of a Finnish-listed company based on inside information about EU regulatory approval.
Legal Action
Prosecuted under Chapter 36, Section 2, considering cross-border element.
Outcome
Convicted; 18 months imprisonment, fully served.
Court highlighted international cooperation between regulators in enforcing market integrity.
Significance
Illustrates that cross-border insider trading is actively prosecuted, with full application of Finnish law.
📌 KEY TAKEAWAYS
Insider trading is illegal even if the information is not public and profit is indirect.
Market manipulation, such as spreading false information or coordinated trading, is criminalized.
Executives and employees are subject to stricter scrutiny due to access to sensitive information.
Sentences vary based on intent, gain, and impact, often including partial or full imprisonment and confiscation of profits.
Cross-border transactions fall under Finnish jurisdiction when Finnish securities are involved.
Courts emphasize both deterrence and protection of investor confidence in sentencing.
RELATED Blog
comments