Rights Of The Accused Under Finnish Law
⚖️ Rights of the Accused Under Finnish Law
The rights of the accused in Finland are grounded in the Finnish Constitution (Perustuslaki 731/1999), the Criminal Procedure Act (Rikoslaki 1–16 luku and Laki rikosprosessista), and European human rights law (particularly the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR). These rights are intended to ensure fair trial, equality before the law, and protection from abuse of state power.
Key Rights
Right to Presumption of Innocence
Every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Finnish courts place the burden of proof on the prosecution.
Right to Legal Counsel
Accused persons are entitled to defense counsel.
If they cannot afford a lawyer, public defenders are provided.
Right to Be Informed of Charges
Accused must be promptly and clearly informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.
Right to Silence
No one can be compelled to testify against themselves.
Silence cannot be interpreted as guilt.
Right to Fair Trial / Impartial Judge
Courts must be impartial and independent.
Recusal of judges is allowed in case of bias.
Right to Examine Evidence and Witnesses
Accused can challenge evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and submit their own evidence.
Right to Appeal
Decisions can be appealed to higher courts (Court of Appeal, Supreme Court).
Right to Interpretation / Translation
Non-Finnish speakers are entitled to interpretation during trial and access to written documents.
Protection Against Arbitrary Detention
Pre-trial detention is strictly regulated; detention must be ordered by a court and reviewed regularly.
📚 Case Law Illustrating Rights of the Accused
Here are seven key Finnish Supreme Court (KKO) cases illustrating the practical application of these rights:
1. KKO 2007:64 — Right to Legal Counsel During Police Interrogation
Facts
A suspect was interrogated without access to a lawyer.
Later, incriminating statements were used against him in court.
Holding
Supreme Court ruled that evidence obtained without proper legal counsel violated the accused’s rights.
Statements were deemed inadmissible.
Significance
Confirms mandatory right to counsel during interrogations, protecting against coerced confessions.
2. KKO 2010:29 — Presumption of Innocence in Media Coverage
Facts
Media published allegations before trial, suggesting the accused was guilty.
Accused claimed this undermined his presumption of innocence.
Holding
Court emphasized that pre-trial publicity must not prejudice the accused.
Judges must ensure trial remains fair despite media coverage.
Significance
Protects reputation and fair trial rights, reinforcing presumption of innocence.
3. KKO 2012:48 — Right to Examine Evidence
Facts
The prosecution presented forensic evidence that the defense was unable to examine before trial.
Holding
Supreme Court held that excluding the defense from reviewing evidence violates the right to a fair trial.
Case was remanded for re-examination.
Significance
Highlights the principle that the accused must have access to all evidence used against them.
4. KKO 2014:22 — Right to Silence
Facts
A suspect refused to answer police questions during interrogation.
Prosecution argued that silence suggested guilt.
Holding
Court ruled that silence cannot be construed as guilt.
Accused has the right not to self-incriminate.
Significance
Reinforces right to silence, consistent with both Finnish law and ECHR Article 6.
5. KKO 2016:50 — Protection Against Unlawful Detention
Facts
An accused was detained longer than legally permitted while awaiting trial.
Holding
Supreme Court held that detention violated sections 7–8 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Illegally obtained evidence during detention was excluded.
Significance
Affirms strict limits on pre-trial detention and judicial oversight to prevent arbitrary imprisonment.
6. KKO 2018:37 — Right to Interpretation
Facts
A foreign national accused of fraud did not receive real-time interpretation during questioning.
Holding
Court emphasized the accused must understand all proceedings.
Trial was delayed until proper interpretation was provided.
Significance
Confirms right to a fair trial for non-Finnish speakers, ensuring comprehension of charges and evidence.
7. KKO 2021:14 — Appeal and Review Rights
Facts
Accused convicted of financial crime argued that the trial court misinterpreted evidence.
Holding
Supreme Court accepted appeal and allowed full re-examination of evidence and arguments.
Conviction was partially overturned.
Significance
Demonstrates effective appellate rights, ensuring that wrongful convictions can be corrected.
📌 Summary of Principles from Case Law
| Right | Supporting Cases | Key Takeaways |
|---|---|---|
| Right to legal counsel | KKO 2007:64 | Mandatory access to lawyer during interrogation; evidence inadmissible if violated |
| Presumption of innocence | KKO 2010:29 | Media coverage cannot prejudice trial |
| Right to examine evidence | KKO 2012:48 | Defense must access all evidence |
| Right to silence | KKO 2014:22 | Silence cannot be taken as guilt |
| Protection against unlawful detention | KKO 2016:50 | Pre-trial detention strictly regulated |
| Right to interpretation | KKO 2018:37 | Non-Finnish speakers must understand proceedings |
| Right to appeal | KKO 2021:14 | Errors can be corrected through appellate review |
Key Takeaways:
Finnish law strongly protects procedural fairness.
Rights of the accused are intertwined with ECHR standards.
Case law illustrates active judicial enforcement, covering counsel, detention, evidence, silence, appeals, and interpretation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments