Make a Submission
No. XLV/2 (2023)
Articles

Criminal policy and sanctions in the 2020s and onwards: Determinants of penal culture in Finland during the last 150 years

Polityka karna i sankcje karne od lat 20. XXI wieku. Determinanty kultury penalnej w Finlandii w ostatnich 150 latach

PDF
  • Raimo Lahti
Raimo Lahti
University of Helsinki
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2023.06

Published 2023-12-27

Keywords

  • criminal policy,
  • criminal sanctions,
  • criminal sciences,
  • penal culture,
  • comparative law,
  • the ideology of punishment,
  • Finnish criminal law

How to Cite

Lahti, R. (2023). Criminal policy and sanctions in the 2020s and onwards: Determinants of penal culture in Finland during the last 150 years: Polityka karna i sankcje karne od lat 20. XXI wieku. Determinanty kultury penalnej w Finlandii w ostatnich 150 latach. Archives of Criminology, (XLV/2), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.7420/AK2023.06
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

This article provides a fragmentary overview of the developments of criminal law and criminal policy in Finland during the last 150 years. It reflects the author’s experiences as a criminal scientist and an expert in drafting criminal legislation over 50 years. This review uses the conclusions from Cesare Beccaria’s classic, centuries-old book as its starting point: a punishment may not be an act of violence, but should be public, immediate, necessary, as minimal as the case allows, proportional to the crime, and determined by law.
The Finnish Penal Code of 1889 was originally thoroughly permeated by both the principles and the spirit of the classical school of penal law, wherein punishment was primarily regarded as retribution for an offence and the penal system was therefore tolerably harmonious with the demands of general deterrence. More weight was given to individual prevention when the Code was first drafted. Later on, the influence of the sociological school of penal law, which focused on the offender and individualized criminal sanctions, led to partial reforms of the penal system, such as the enactment of the Conditional Sentences Act of 1918, the Dangerous Recidivists Act of 1932, and the Young Offenders Act of 1940. The day fine system of 1921 and the fluctuations in the ideology regarding indeterminate penal sanctions are analyzed.
The total reform of the Penal Code between 1972 and 2003 aimed to create a more rational penal system – one designed for efficient, just, and humane criminal justice. An ambitious attempt was made in as uniform and systematic a way as possible to assess the goals, interests, and values that the new Criminal Code should promote and protect. The existence of the criminal justice system was justified on utilitarian grounds. The structure and operation of a penal system, however, cannot be founded solely on the basis of utility; the criteria of justice and humaneness must also be applied. The penal system must be rational in regard to both its goals (utility) and its values (justice and humaneness).
The developments since the 1990s have been characterized by the influence of human rights and basic rights on both criminal and procedural law, as well as by the effects of internationalizing and Europeanizing the criminal justice system. The latter tendencies have resulted in the diversification of criminal law.

PDF

References

  1. Anttila I. (1971). ʻConservative and radical criminal policy in the Nordic countries.ʼ Scandinavian Studies in Criminology 3, pp. 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1086/660822
  2. Anttila I. (2001a). Ad Ius Criminale Humanius: Essays in Criminology, Criminal Justice and Criminal Policy. Helsinki: Finnish Lawyersʼ Association.
  3. Anttila I. (2001b). ʻTalking with Cesare Beccaria.ʼ In I. Anttila (ed.) Ad Ius Criminale Humanius: Essays in Criminology, Criminal Justice and Criminal Policy. Helsinki: Finnish Lawyersʼ Association, pp. 59–61.
  4. Anttila I. (2011). ʻAddress to the ESC on the occasion of the European Criminology Award 2011.ʼ Criminology in Europe 3, pp. 8–10.
  5. Anttila I. and Törnudd P. (1973). Kriminologi i kriminalpolitiskt perspektiv [Criminology in a criminal policy perspective]. Stockholm: Norstedt's.
  6. Anttila I. and Törnudd P. (2001). ʻThe dynamics of the Finnish Criminal Code reform.ʼ In I. Anttila (ed.) Ad Ius Criminale Humanius: Essays in Criminology, Criminal Justice and Criminal Policy. Helsinki: Finnish Lawyersʼ Association, pp. 202–220.
  7. Ashworth A. and Zedner L. (2014). Preventive Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  8. Asp P., Bitzilekis N., Bogdan S., Elholm T., Foffani L., Frände D., Fuchs H., Kaiafa-Gbandi M., Leblois-Happe J., Nieto Martín A., Prittwitz C., Satzger H., Symeonidou-Kastanidou E., and Zerbes I. (2009). ʻA manifesto on European criminal policy.ʼ Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 12, pp. 707–716.
  9. Becaria C. (1998). Rikoksesta ja rangaistuksesta [On crimes and punishments]. Heikkilä K. (transl.). Helsinki: Edita.
  10. Beccaria C. (1977). Om brott och straff [On crimes and punishments]. Enoksson P. (transl.). Stockholm-Roma: Casa editrice Italica.
  11. Beccaria C. (1995). On Crimes and Punishments and Other Writings. Bellamy R. (ed.), Davies R. (transl.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Bolster N., Gless S., and Jessberger F. (eds.) (2021). Histories of Transnational Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Christensen M.J., Lohne K., and Hörnqvist M. (2022). Nordic Criminal Justice in a Global Context. Practices and Promotion of Exceptionalism. London: Routledge.
  14. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Official Journal of the European Union C 115, 9.5.2008, pp. 1–388.
  15. Criminal Code (39/1889; amendments up to 433/2021 included) (2021). Available online: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039_20210433.pdf [25.10.2023].
  16. Cuesta J.L. de la, Blanco Cordero I., and Odriozola Gurrutxaga M. (eds.) (2020). Resolutions of the Congresses of the Association Internationale de Droit Pénal (1926–2019). Antwerpen: Maklu Uitgevers N.V.
  17. Delmas-Marty M. (1997). Corpus Juris. Paris: Economica.
  18. Delmas-Marty M. and Vervaele J. (eds.) (2000–2001). The Implementation of the Corpus Juris in the Member States, Vols I–IV. Antwerpen–Groningen-Oxford: Intersentia.
  19. Ferrajoli L. (2014). ʻTwo hundred and fifty years since the publication of on crimes and punishments: The currency of Cesare Beccaria’s thought.ʼ Punishment & Society 16(5), pp. 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474514551524
  20. Hallituksen esitys 66/1988 Eduskunnalle rikoslainsäädännön kokonaisuudistuksen ensimmäisen vaiheen käsittäväksi rikoslain jaeräiden muiden lakien muutoksiksi [Government Bill 66/1988 to the Parliament concerning the legal amendments for the first stage of the total reform of penal legislation] (1988). Available online: https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/HallituksenEsitys/Documents/he_66+1988.pdf [26.10.2023].
  21. Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle valvottua koevapautta koskevaksi lainsäädännöksi 140/2012 [The Governmentʼs proposal to Parliament for legislation on supervised probationary leave] 140/2012 (2012).
  22. Herik L. van den and Stahn C. (eds.) (2012). The Diversification and Fragmentation of International Criminal Law. Leiden-Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
  23. Husa J. (2018). Advanced Introduction to Law and Globalisation. Cheltenham: Elgar.
  24. Kampen P.H. van and Young W. (eds.) (2014). Prevention of Reoffending. The Value of Rehabilitation and the Management of High Risk Offenders. Cambridge–Antwerp–Portland: Intersentia.
  25. Komiteanmietintö [Committee report] (1968).
  26. Komiteanmietintö [Committee report] (1976).
  27. Lagutskottets betänkande 3/1867 (Nådiga Propositionen N:o 11) [The report of the Legal Affairs Committee of Lantdag 3/1867 (as for Nådiga Propositionen No. 11)], s. 508–509.
  28. Lahti R. (1977). ʻCriminal sanctions in Finland: A system in transition.ʼ Scandinavian Studies in Law 21, pp. 119–157.
  29. Lahti R. (2012). ʻTowards Internationalization and Europeanization of Criminal Policy and Criminal Justice – Challenges to Comparative Research.ʼ In E.W. Pływaczewski (ed.) Current Problems of the Penal Law and Criminology. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, pp. 365–379.
  30. Lahti R. (2013). ʻInkeri Anttila (1916–2013). In Memoriam.ʼ Revue Internationale de Droit Pénal 51(1–2), pp. 175–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003445200000118
  31. Lahti R. (2017). ʻTowards a more efficient, fair and humane criminal justice system: Developments of criminal policy and criminal sanctions during the last 50 years in Finland.ʼ Cogent Social Sciences 3(1), pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2017.1303910
  32. Lahti R. (2019). Zur Kriminal- und Strafrechtspolitik des 21. Jahrhunderts Der Blickwinkel eines nordischen Wohlfahrtsstaates und dessen Strafgesetzreformen: Finnland [About criminal policy and criminal law policy of the 21st century. A perspective of a Nordic welfare state and its criminal law reforms: Finland]. Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110647990
  33. Lahti R. (2020). ʻMultilayered criminal policy: The Finnish experience regarding the development of Europeanized criminal justice.ʼ New Journal of European Criminal Law 11(1), pp. 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2032284419898527
  34. Lahti R. (2021a). ʻDay Fines in Finland.ʼ In E. Kantorowicz-Reznichenko and M. Faure (eds.) Day Fines in Europe: Assessing Income-Based Sanctions in Criminal Justice Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 24–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108855020.003
  35. Lahti R. (2021b). ʻLife imprisonment and other long-term sentences in the Finnish criminal justice system: Fluctuations in penal policy.ʼ In K. Ghanayim and Y. Shany (eds.) The Quest for Core Values in the Application of Legal Norms. Essays in Honor of Mordechai Kremnitzer. Cham: Springer, pp. 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78953-4_12
  36. Lahti R. (2021c). Towards an Efficient, Just and Humane Criminal Justice: Nordic Essays on Criminal Law, Criminology and Criminal Policy 1972–2020. Helsinki: Finnish Lawyersʼ Association. Available online: https://edition.fi/lakimiesyhdistys/catalog/view/121/68/223-3 [27.09.2023].
  37. Lahti R. (2022). ʻThe Origin and Development of Quasi-criminal Enforcement Mechanisms in Europe: Nordic Perspective.ʼ In V. Franssen and C. Harding (eds.) Criminal and Quasi-criminal Enforcement Mechanisms in Europe. Origins, Concepts, Future. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 11–24. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509932894.ch-001
  38. Laki 435/2013 rikoslain muuttamisesta Annettu Helsingissä 14 päivänä kesäkuuta 2013 [Statute 435/2013 amending the Criminal Code Adopted in Helsinki on 14 June 2013] (2013). Available online: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kokoelma/2013/sk20130435.pdf [26.10.2023].
  39. Lakivaliokunnan mietintö n:o 6/1990 hallituksen esityksen 66/1988 johdosta rikoslainsäädännön kokonaisuudituksen ensimmäisen vaiheen käsittäväksi rikoslain ja eräiden muiden lakien muutoksiksi [Report 6/1990 of the Legal Affairs Committee of the Parliament on the Goverment Bill 66/1988 concerning the legal amendments for the first stage of the total reform of the penal lagislation] (1990). Available online: https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/vaski/Mietinto/Documents/lavm_6+1990.pdf [26.10.2023].
  40. Lappi-Seppälä T. (2012). ʻPenal policies in the Nordic countries 1960–2010.ʼ Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention 13(1), pp. 85–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/14043858.2012.740858
  41. Lohse M. (2012). Terrorismirikoksen valmistelu ja edistäminen [Preparation for and promotion of terrorist crimes]. Helsinki: Suomalainen Lakimiesyhdistys.
  42. Matikkala J. (2007). ʻOm slutskakning – den finska strafflagsrevisionens sista fasʼ [About the final shake-up – the final phase of the Finnish Criminal Code revision]. In P. Laitinen (ed.) Nordisk workshop för straffrätt 23–25.3.2007 [Nordic workshop for criminal law 23-25.3.2007]. Rovaniemi: Lapplands universitet, pp. 95–105.
  43. Melander S. (2008). Kriminalisointiteoria – rangaistavaksi säätämisen oikeudelliset rajoitukset [A theory of criminalization – legal constraints to criminal legislation]. Helsinki: Suomalainen Lakimiesyhdistys.
  44. Nuotio K. (2023). ʻFrom transnational law to global criminal law.ʼ In F. Jessberger, M. Vormbaum, B. Burghardt (eds.) Strafrecht und Systemunrecht. Festschrift für Gerhard Werle [Criminal law and systematic wrongfulness. Festschrift in honour of Gerhard Werle]. Tűbingen: Mohr Siebeck, pp. 469–478.
  45. Oikeusministeriö [Ministry of Justice] (2014). Oikeudenmukainen, avoin ja luottamukselle rakentuva yhteiskunta [A fair, open and trusting society]. Oikeusministeriön julkaisuja 41/2014. Available online: https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/handle/10024/76551 [27.10.2023].
  46. Pratt J. and Eriksson A. (2013). Contrasts in Punishment. An Explanation of Anglophone Excess and Nordic Exceptionalism. London–New York: Routledge.
  47. Redo S.M. (2012). Blue Criminology. The Power of United Nations Ideas to Counter Crime Globally. A Monographic Study. Helsinki: HEUNI.
  48. Satzger H. (2013). ʻA manifesto on European Criminal Procedure Law: Summary.ʼ Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 11, p. 411.
  49. Schünemann B. (2006). Ein Gesamtkonzept für die europäische Strafrechtspflege [A comprehensive concept for the European administration of justice]. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag.
  50. Strömholm S. (1979). ʻBakgrund och förutsättningar för Cesare Beccarias verkʼ [Background and prerequisites for Cesare Beccariaʼs work]. Svensk Juristtidning 63, pp. 657–662.
  51. Tiedemann K. (2002). Wirtschaftsstrafrecht in der Europäischen Union [Economic criminal law in the European Union]. Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag.
  52. Vervaele J. (2023). Towards a European Reassessment of Punitive Law Enforcement?. Den Haag: Eleven.
  53. Wahlberg M. (2003). Den finska straffrättsvetenskapens födelse I [The birth of Finnish criminal justice I]. Helsinki: Juridiska fakulteten vid Helsingfors universitet.