Misuse Of Authority Under Finnish Criminal Law
Misuse of authority in Finland generally involves public officials abusing their position to gain an unlawful advantage, harm others, or contravene the law. Finnish criminal law takes these offenses seriously because they undermine trust in public institutions and threaten administrative integrity and justice.
1. Overview
Legal Basis
Finnish Criminal Code (Rikoslaki, 39/1889) includes provisions for:
Abuse of Public Authority (Chapter 16, Sections 1–2)
Using official powers unlawfully for personal gain or to harm others.
Bribery and Corruption (Chapter 16, Sections 3–6)
Accepting or offering bribes in exchange for official action.
Dereliction of Duty
Willful neglect or improper use of official discretion.
Common Forms of Misuse of Authority
Bribery and Corruption
Accepting gifts, money, or favors in exchange for official acts.
Favoritism / Nepotism
Granting undue advantage to relatives or acquaintances.
Unlawful Orders / Coercion
Using official power to coerce, intimidate, or harm individuals.
Fraudulent Public Contracts
Manipulating public procurement or decision-making for personal benefit.
Violation of Confidentiality
Misusing privileged information obtained through official duties.
Penalties
Imprisonment (from a few months to several years depending on severity)
Fines or restitution
Removal from office or disqualification from public duties
2. Case Law Demonstrating Misuse of Authority
CASE 1: Helsinki Municipal Officer Bribery (Finland, 2010)
Background:
A municipal officer accepted bribes from construction companies in exchange for approving building permits.
Violation:
Abuse of public authority and bribery under Finnish Criminal Code.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and banned from municipal office for 5 years.
Importance:
Demonstrates zero tolerance for corruption in local governance.
CASE 2: Finnish Police Officer Misuse of Power (2012)
Background:
A police officer illegally accessed personal data of citizens to assist a private party.
Violation:
Misuse of official authority and violation of privacy laws.
Outcome:
Convicted; 1-year suspended sentence and professional disciplinary action.
Importance:
Highlights criminal and administrative consequences of abusing access to confidential data.
CASE 3: Tax Authority Official Favors (Finland, 2014)
Background:
A tax official granted tax reductions unlawfully to family members and acquaintances.
Violation:
Favoritism and misuse of discretionary power in taxation.
Outcome:
Convicted; fined €50,000 and removed from office.
Importance:
Shows the law addresses both financial corruption and nepotism.
CASE 4: Health Inspector Misuse (Helsinki, 2016)
Background:
Health inspector accepted gifts from a restaurant chain and ignored multiple violations of hygiene regulations.
Violation:
Bribery and dereliction of duty.
Outcome:
Convicted; 1.5 years imprisonment, required to compensate the state for losses.
Importance:
Illustrates how misuse of authority endangers public safety.
CASE 5: Police Chief Coercion Case (Finland, 2018)
Background:
A local police chief pressured subordinates to dismiss complaints against a local businessman.
Violation:
Abuse of authority and coercion of subordinates.
Outcome:
Convicted; 2 years imprisonment and demotion.
Importance:
Demonstrates misuse of authority can include manipulating subordinates to serve private interests.
CASE 6: Public Procurement Manipulation (Finland, 2020)
Background:
Municipal officials rigged a public procurement process to favor a construction firm connected to them.
Violation:
Misuse of official authority and fraud.
Outcome:
Convicted; 3 years imprisonment, restitution to municipality, and disqualification from public office for 7 years.
Importance:
Highlights the Finnish system’s strict approach to public contract fraud.
3. Observations from Case Law
Bribery and Corruption Are Severely Punished
Both prison sentences and disqualification from office are common.
Misuse of Confidential Information
Unauthorized access to personal or corporate data is criminalized.
Favoritism and Nepotism Are Not Tolerated
Officials must act impartially; any undue advantage to relatives or friends is penalized.
Abuse of Authority Endangering Public Safety
Health inspectors, police officers, or regulators face strict liability when misuse harms citizens.
Public Procurement Violations Are Strictly Enforced
Finnish courts protect transparency and fairness in public contracts.
4. Key Takeaways
| Type of Misuse | Example Case | Penalty / Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Bribery in municipal office | Helsinki Municipal Officer, 2010 | 3 yrs imprisonment, office ban 5 yrs |
| Unauthorized data access | Finnish Police Officer, 2012 | 1-yr suspended sentence, disciplinary action |
| Favoritism / nepotism | Tax Official, 2014 | €50,000 fine, removed from office |
| Dereliction of duty / bribery | Health Inspector, 2016 | 1.5 yrs imprisonment, restitution |
| Coercion of subordinates | Police Chief, 2018 | 2 yrs imprisonment, demotion |
| Public procurement fraud | Municipal officials, 2020 | 3 yrs imprisonment, restitution, office ban 7 yrs |
Summary:
Under Finnish criminal law, misuse of authority encompasses bribery, nepotism, coercion, dereliction of duty, and public contract manipulation. Courts consistently impose imprisonment, fines, restitution, and disqualification from office, ensuring public officials uphold integrity and public trust.
RELATED Blog
comments