Public participation in Finnish rule-making
Public Participation in Finnish Rule-Making
Overview
Public participation in rule-making is a cornerstone of democratic governance in Finland. It ensures that:
Citizens and stakeholders have a voice in the creation of laws and regulations.
Transparency and accountability in government decision-making are enhanced.
Rules reflect broader societal interests and values.
Legal Framework for Public Participation
Constitution of Finland (Section 74) guarantees citizens the right to be heard before a public authority makes a decision in a matter that concerns them.
Act on the Openness of Government Activities (621/1999) mandates transparency and access to information.
Legislative Drafting Rules issued by the Ministry of Justice require public consultation during the rule-making process.
Administrative agencies must publish draft regulations for comments and organize hearings when appropriate.
The principle of legality and good governance in Finnish administrative law requires authorities to consider public input seriously.
Forms of Public Participation
Public consultations and hearings on draft laws and regulations.
Written submissions and opinions from interest groups, NGOs, and citizens.
Stakeholder engagement in preparatory legislative committees.
Online platforms for commenting on draft rules.
Case Laws Illustrating Public Participation in Finnish Rule-Making
1. Supreme Administrative Court, Case KHO:2004:59 (2004)
Issue: The case involved a challenge to a regulation adopted without adequate public consultation.
The court emphasized that failure to conduct proper consultation may render the regulation unlawful if it significantly affects public interests.
The court ruled that administrative authorities must ensure that affected parties have a meaningful opportunity to express their views before rule-making.
Significance: Established that the procedural right to participation is integral to the legality of administrative regulations.
2. Supreme Administrative Court, Case KHO:2010:72 (2010)
Issue: A dispute arose concerning the adoption of environmental regulations without adequate public hearing.
The Court held that environmental laws require extensive public participation due to their impact on the environment and communities.
The decision stressed that the lack of public participation violates principles of good governance and can invalidate administrative decisions.
Significance: Strengthened the procedural safeguards for public participation in environmental rule-making.
3. Supreme Administrative Court, Case KHO:2014:50 (2014)
Issue: This case dealt with the administrative agency’s obligation to consider public comments on a draft urban planning regulation.
The Court ruled that while authorities have discretion, they must genuinely consider and respond to public submissions.
Ignoring substantial public concerns could be grounds for annulment of the rule.
Significance: Clarified the qualitative aspect of public participation beyond mere formality.
4. Supreme Administrative Court, Case KHO:2017:101 (2017)
Issue: Challenge to a tax regulation that was fast-tracked without public consultation due to urgency.
The Court accepted that in exceptional circumstances, public participation might be limited.
However, the Court stipulated that such exceptions must be strictly justified and temporary.
Significance: Balanced the need for efficient governance with the fundamental right of participation.
5. Supreme Administrative Court, Case KHO:2020:28 (2020)
Issue: Dispute over social welfare regulations adopted without adequate stakeholder input.
The Court reaffirmed that public participation is essential especially when rules affect vulnerable groups.
The Court emphasized that public participation promotes transparency, legitimacy, and better policy outcomes.
The regulation was annulled due to procedural deficiencies.
Significance: Reinforced the role of participation in protecting social rights.
Summary
Public participation is a fundamental principle underpinning Finnish rule-making, rooted in constitutional and administrative law.
The Supreme Administrative Court consistently upholds the procedural rights of citizens and stakeholders to be heard before regulations are finalized.
Public participation is not just a formality; authorities must meaningfully consider input.
Exceptions to participation are allowed but strictly limited to urgent or exceptional circumstances.
Case law demonstrates that lack of adequate public participation can lead to annulment of administrative rules.
This framework strengthens democratic legitimacy, transparency, and improves quality of regulations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments