Victim-Offender Mediation In Finland
🇫🇮 VICTIM-OFFENDER MEDIATION IN FINLAND
Victim-Offender Mediation (VOM), known in Finnish as “sovittelu rikosasioissa”, is a key restorative justice tool. It allows offenders and victims to engage in dialogue to resolve the harm caused by criminal acts outside traditional court sentencing. Mediation in Finland is voluntary and facilitated by trained mediators under the Criminal Procedure Act (Oikeudenkäymiskaari) and related legislation.
1. Legal Framework
A. Key Legislation
Criminal Procedure Act, Chapter 2 and 3
Authorizes courts and prosecutors to refer cases to mediation before or during prosecution.
Victim Support Act (135/2010)
Ensures victims have access to information, guidance, and mediation services.
Finnish Mediation Act (1015/2005)
Regulates formal mediation processes, confidentiality, and mediators’ duties.
B. Applicability
Mediation is most common for:
Minor assaults
Theft, property damage
Harassment or defamation
Juvenile offences
Serious offences (e.g., homicide, sexual violence) may be excluded, though preliminary dialogue may occur in limited cases.
C. Principles
Voluntariness: Both parties must agree.
Confidentiality: Statements in mediation cannot be used in court.
Restorative outcome: Focus on apology, restitution, or agreement on reparation.
Not a substitute for prosecution: Mediation does not prevent criminal charges if the offence is serious.
D. Benefits
Reduces court caseload
Enhances victim satisfaction and closure
Encourages offender accountability
May reduce recidivism
2. Key Principles in Finnish Case Law
Mediation is considered a formal part of the justice process, not merely social work.
Successful mediation can influence sentencing (e.g., fines, conditional sentences).
Courts may adjourn minor cases for mediation to be attempted.
Participation cannot be coerced; consent is essential.
Offender willingness to make restitution or apologize is heavily weighed in court.
3. Illustrative Finnish Case Law
Here are six notable cases illustrating the use of mediation:
1. KKO 2000:52 – Juvenile Theft Mediation
Facts
15-year-old stole electronics from school.
Victim agreed to mediation.
Court’s Reasoning
Mediation restored both restitution and apology.
Juvenile law emphasizes rehabilitation over punishment.
Outcome
Court accepted conditional sentence instead of detention.
Significance: Mediation can reduce formal punishment for juvenile offenders.
2. Hovioikeus Helsinki 2005 – Assault Case
Facts
Minor assault between neighbors over noise dispute.
Parties participated in mediation; offender apologized, offered restitution for medical expenses.
Court’s Reasoning
Mediation resolved interpersonal conflict and restored victim’s interests.
Court noted positive impact on community trust.
Outcome
Conditional fine imposed; no imprisonment.
Significance: Mediation can guide courts toward restorative outcomes for minor personal crimes.
3. KKO 2008:41 – Property Damage Mediation
Facts
Defendant damaged public property (vandalism) in a park.
Mediation led to offender repairing damages and apologizing publicly.
Court’s Reasoning
Offender’s active participation demonstrated acceptance of responsibility.
Restorative actions reduce need for harsh penalties.
Outcome
Conditional sentence and community service imposed.
Significance: Mediation aligns offender accountability with public interest.
4. Hovioikeus Eastern Finland 2012 – Theft from Elderly Victim
Facts
Offender stole money from elderly neighbor.
Mediation led to return of funds and formal apology.
Court’s Reasoning
Mediation resolved financial harm and emotional distress.
Victim satisfaction influenced sentencing.
Outcome
Court imposed a fine and conditional suspension of sentence.
Significance: Mediation emphasizes victim-centric justice even for vulnerable victims.
5. KKO 2015:27 – School Bullying / Harassment
Facts
Teenager bullied classmate online and in school.
Mediation session facilitated dialogue; offender expressed remorse and agreed to change behavior.
Court’s Reasoning
Focus on rehabilitation, education, and prevention of recidivism.
Successful mediation showed willingness to reform.
Outcome
Conditional fine; mandatory counseling recommended.
Significance: Mediation supports behavioral correction in youth offences.
6. Hovioikeus Helsinki 2018 – Minor Assault with Restitution
Facts
Minor fight between colleagues at workplace.
Mediation led to apology and compensation for medical bills.
Court’s Reasoning
Mediation resolved interpersonal conflict and avoided escalation.
Court considered offender’s cooperative attitude in sentencing.
Outcome
Conditional imprisonment; restitution ordered.
Significance: Workplace conflicts can also be mediated under Finnish restorative law.
4. Key Takeaways from Finnish Case Law
Voluntary participation and mutual consent are prerequisites.
Victim satisfaction and restitution heavily influence court sentencing.
Juveniles benefit most, but adults can also access mediation.
Restorative outcomes (apology, restitution, community service) can reduce fines or prevent imprisonment.
Mediation does not replace prosecution for serious crimes but may complement court decisions.
Finnish courts view mediation as a tool to restore social balance and reduce repeat offending.
RELATED Blog
0 comments