Quality of Democracy
#2Key Findings
With an outstanding mix of procedures and protections, Finland falls into the top group internationally (rank 2) with regard to quality of democracy. Its score on this measure is unchanged relative to its 2014 level.
Campaign-finance laws are strict, featuring transparency requirements and independent monitoring. A widely used popular-initiative system allows the public to submit issues to parliament on a non-binding basis. The media is strongly independent, but becoming increasingly concentrated. Media organizations performed well during the pandemic, producing credible news and debunking misinformation.
Civil rights are generally strongly protected. The government issued some recommendations during the pandemic that in practice restricted rights. Anti-discrimination rules are broad, although the small Roma community is marginalized. The Finns Party has encouraged discrimination against ethnic minorities.
Legal certainty is a strong part of the political culture, although parliamentary scrutiny of government decisions was diminished during the pandemic. The government issued comprehensive, easy-to-understand information related to COVID-19. Courts are independent, though no constitutional court exists. Corruption is rare.
Campaign-finance laws are strict, featuring transparency requirements and independent monitoring. A widely used popular-initiative system allows the public to submit issues to parliament on a non-binding basis. The media is strongly independent, but becoming increasingly concentrated. Media organizations performed well during the pandemic, producing credible news and debunking misinformation.
Civil rights are generally strongly protected. The government issued some recommendations during the pandemic that in practice restricted rights. Anti-discrimination rules are broad, although the small Roma community is marginalized. The Finns Party has encouraged discrimination against ethnic minorities.
Legal certainty is a strong part of the political culture, although parliamentary scrutiny of government decisions was diminished during the pandemic. The government issued comprehensive, easy-to-understand information related to COVID-19. Courts are independent, though no constitutional court exists. Corruption is rare.
Graph View
Graph View
How fair are procedures for registering candidates and parties?
10
9
9
Legal regulations provide for a fair registration procedure for all elections; candidates and parties are not discriminated against.
8
7
6
7
6
A few restrictions on election procedures discriminate against a small number of candidates and parties.
5
4
3
4
3
Some unreasonable restrictions on election procedures exist that discriminate against many candidates and parties.
2
1
1
Discriminating registration procedures for elections are widespread and prevent a large number of potential candidates or parties from participating.
The electoral process in Finland is free and fair, and the country’s constitution grants Finnish citizens the right to participate in national elections and referendums. Registered political parties have the right to nominate candidates, though all voters have the right to influence the nomination process. Electoral associations of at least 100 enfranchised citizens also have the right of nomination. However, the role of these associations has been marginal. Candidates for presidential elections can be nominated by any political party that is represented in parliament at the time of nomination. Candidates may also be nominated by associations of at least 20,000 enfranchised citizens. President Sauli Niinistö, who was re-elected by an overwhelming majority in the 2018 elections, preferred to be nominated by a voters’ association rather than a specific political party and collected more than 150,000 supportive signatures for this purpose.
Presidential candidates must be Finnish citizens by birth, while young people under guardianship and those in active military service cannot stand as candidates in parliamentary elections. The procedure for registering political parties is regulated by the Party Law of 1969. Parties which fail to elect representatives to parliament in two successive elections are removed from the list of registered parties. However, by gathering signatures of 5,000 supporters, a party may be re-registered.
In the spring of 2021, municipal elections were postponed by six weeks due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Citations:
Dag Anckar and Carsten Anckar, “Finland,” in Dieter Nohlen and Philip Stöver, eds. Elections in Europe. A Data Handbook, Nomos, 2010.
Presidential candidates must be Finnish citizens by birth, while young people under guardianship and those in active military service cannot stand as candidates in parliamentary elections. The procedure for registering political parties is regulated by the Party Law of 1969. Parties which fail to elect representatives to parliament in two successive elections are removed from the list of registered parties. However, by gathering signatures of 5,000 supporters, a party may be re-registered.
In the spring of 2021, municipal elections were postponed by six weeks due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Citations:
Dag Anckar and Carsten Anckar, “Finland,” in Dieter Nohlen and Philip Stöver, eds. Elections in Europe. A Data Handbook, Nomos, 2010.
To what extent do candidates and parties have fair access to the media and other means of communication?
10
9
9
All candidates and parties have equal opportunities of access to the media and other means of communication. All major media outlets provide a fair and balanced coverage of the range of different political positions.
8
7
6
7
6
Candidates and parties have largely equal opportunities of access to the media and other means of communication. The major media outlets provide a fair and balanced coverage of different political positions.
5
4
3
4
3
Candidates and parties often do not have equal opportunities of access to the media and other means of communication. While the major media outlets represent a partisan political bias, the media system as a whole provides fair coverage of different political positions.
2
1
1
Candidates and parties lack equal opportunities of access to the media and other means of communications. The major media outlets are biased in favor of certain political groups or views and discriminate against others.
The access of candidates and parties to media and means of communication is fair in principle, but practical constraints, such as the duration and breadth of a program’s coverage, restrict access for smaller parties and candidates to televised debates and other media appearances. Given the increased impact of such appearances on the electoral outcome, this bias is somewhat problematic from the point of view of fairness and justice. However, the restrictions reflect practical considerations rather than ideological agendas. Access to newspapers and commercial forms of communication is unrestricted, though in practice it is dependent on the economic resources of parties and individual candidates. Candidates are required to report on the sources of their campaign funds. Social media play an increasing role in candidates’ electoral campaigns, as these outlets now attract a growing share of voters. This also means that candidates are less dependent on party organizations and external funding for campaigning. As a consequence of the enhanced role of social media, campaigns are likely to be longer at the same time as candidates are expected to continuously share their opinion on a multitude of issues. Such trends are especially important in Finland, since the country uses an open list proportional system in which the order candidates are elected from the party lists is dependent on the number of personal votes received.
Citations:
Strandberg, Kim (2012): Sosiaalisen median vallankumous? Ehdokkaat, valitsijat ja sosiaalinen media vuoden 2011 eduskuntavaaleissa. In: S. Borg (ed.), Muutosvaalit 2011, Helsinki: Ministry of Justice, 79-93.
Laakso, Mikko (2017). Sosiaalinen media vaalikampanjoinnissa.
Citations:
Strandberg, Kim (2012): Sosiaalisen median vallankumous? Ehdokkaat, valitsijat ja sosiaalinen media vuoden 2011 eduskuntavaaleissa. In: S. Borg (ed.), Muutosvaalit 2011, Helsinki: Ministry of Justice, 79-93.
Laakso, Mikko (2017). Sosiaalinen media vaalikampanjoinnissa.
To what extent do all citizens have the opportunity to exercise their right of participation in national elections?
10
9
9
All adult citizens can participate in national elections. All eligible voters are registered if they wish to be. There are no discriminations observable in the exercise of the right to vote. There are no disincentives to voting.
8
7
6
7
6
The procedures for the registration of voters and voting are for the most part effective, impartial and nondiscriminatory. Citizens can appeal to courts if they feel being discriminated. Disincentives to voting generally do not constitute genuine obstacles.
5
4
3
4
3
While the procedures for the registration of voters and voting are de jure non-discriminatory, isolated cases of discrimination occur in practice. For some citizens, disincentives to voting constitute significant obstacles.
2
1
1
The procedures for the registration of voters or voting have systemic discriminatory effects. De facto, a substantial number of adult citizens are excluded from national elections.
Electoral provisions stipulate universal suffrage for all adult Finnish citizens (including prisoners and mentally disabled people), a secret-ballot voting method, a minimum voting age of 18, non-compulsory voting, an entitlement to vote for expatriated Finnish citizens, and the exclusion of non-Finnish nationals resident in Finland from national elections. However, non-Finnish permanent residents may vote in municipal elections. The population registration center maintains a register of people eligible to vote, and sends a notification to those included in the register. Citizens do not need to register separately to be able to vote. A system of advance voting has been in place for several decades now, and the proportion of ballots cast in advance has risen significantly. Electronic voting was tested in three municipalities during the 2008 municipal elections, but has not been adopted in subsequent elections. In its final report from 2017, a working group on the issue appointed by the Ministry of Justice stated that while technically feasible, an online voting system is still not ready to be implemented, since the technology is not yet at a sufficiently high level to meet all relevant requirements. However, the government has declared internet-based voting methods as a policy objective.
Citations:
Dag Anckar and Carsten Anckar, “Finland,” in Dieter Nohlen and Philip Stöver, eds. Elections in Europe. A Data Handbook, Nomos, 2010.
https://vaalit.fi/en/electronic-voting1
Citations:
Dag Anckar and Carsten Anckar, “Finland,” in Dieter Nohlen and Philip Stöver, eds. Elections in Europe. A Data Handbook, Nomos, 2010.
https://vaalit.fi/en/electronic-voting1
To what extent is private and public party financing and electoral campaign financing transparent, effectively monitored and in case of infringement of rules subject to proportionate and dissuasive sanction?
10
9
9
The state enforces that donations to political parties are made public and provides for independent monitoring to that respect. Effective measures to prevent evasion are effectively in place and infringements subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions.
8
7
6
7
6
The state enforces that donations to political parties are made public and provides for independent monitoring. Although infringements are subject to proportionate sanctions, some, although few, loopholes and options for circumvention still exist.
5
4
3
4
3
The state provides that donations to political parties shall be published. Party financing is subject to some degree of independent monitoring but monitoring either proves regularly ineffective or proportionate sanctions in case of infringement do not follow.
2
1
1
The rules for party and campaign financing do not effectively enforce the obligation to make the donations public. Party and campaign financing is neither monitored independently nor, in case of infringements, subject to proportionate sanctions.
New campaign-finance legislation was implemented between 2008 and 2009, in the wake of several political financing scandals. This legislation requires politicians to disclose funding sources, and has provided for independent and efficient monitoring. There are now bans on donations from foreign interests, corporations holding government contracts and anonymous donors. In addition, there are limits on the amount a donor can contribute over a time period or during an election. Currently, a single private donor can donate up to €6,000 to a candidate standing in a parliamentary election. Candidates are required to report the sources of their campaign funds. These reports are filed with ministries and auditing agencies, and made publicly available. Financing scandals involving parties and candidates continue to attract media coverage, and studies indicate that parties are likely to lose electoral support if they are involved in finance scandals. As a result of the new rules, the quality of party financing has improved and public opinion polls indicate that the credibility of politicians has increased.
Citations:
http://www.idea.int/parties/finance;
https://www.idea.int/data-tools/country-view/105/55
Demokratiapuntari 2012: Yhteenveto. Ministry of Justice/MTV3/tnsGallup, 02/2012;
Mattila, Mikko and Sundberg, Jan 2012: Vaalirahoitus ja vaalirahakohu. In: Borg, Sami (ed.): Muutosvaalit 2011. Oikeusministeriön selvityksiä ja ohjeita 16/2012. Oikeusministeriö (Ministry of Justice), pp.227–238.
Citations:
http://www.idea.int/parties/finance;
https://www.idea.int/data-tools/country-view/105/55
Demokratiapuntari 2012: Yhteenveto. Ministry of Justice/MTV3/tnsGallup, 02/2012;
Mattila, Mikko and Sundberg, Jan 2012: Vaalirahoitus ja vaalirahakohu. In: Borg, Sami (ed.): Muutosvaalit 2011. Oikeusministeriön selvityksiä ja ohjeita 16/2012. Oikeusministeriö (Ministry of Justice), pp.227–238.
Do citizens have the opportunity to take binding political decisions when they want to do so?
10
9
9
Citizens have the effective opportunity to actively propose and take binding decisions on issues of importance to them through popular initiatives and referendums. The set of eligible issues is extensive, and includes national, regional, and local issues.
8
7
6
7
6
Citizens have the effective opportunity to take binding decisions on issues of importance to them through either popular initiatives or referendums. The set of eligible issues covers at least two levels of government.
5
4
3
4
3
Citizens have the effective opportunity to vote on issues of importance to them through a legally binding measure. The set of eligible issues is limited to one level of government.
2
1
1
Citizens have no effective opportunity to vote on issues of importance to them through a legally binding measure.
The government incorporated referendums into the Finnish constitution in 1987. The provision, laid down in the Law of Procedures in Advisory Referendums, enable advisory referendums to be called by parliament by means of special laws that specify the date of voting and establish the alternatives to be presented to the voters. There are no minimum participation rates or required vote majorities specified. Since that time, only a single national referendum has taken place, in 1994. This addressed Finland’s entry into the European Union.
While this mechanism does not enable direct citizen participation in public policymaking, a constitutional amendment in 2012 introduced a popular-initiative system. This system requires parliament to consider any petition that receives 50,000 signatures or more within six months. However, citizens do not themselves have the opportunity to vote on the initiative issues, as the right of decision and agenda-setting remains with the parliament. The first initiative to receive enough signatories to be submitted to parliament was on the prohibition of fur farming; it was subsequently rejected. A later initiative concerning same-sex marriage also received a sufficient number of signatories and was approved by the parliament after a heated debate. In 2017, an initiative to repeal this decision received more than 100,000 signatures, but was rejected by parliament. Since the system’s establishment, more than 1,300 initiatives have been brought up, 56 of which have been submitted to the parliament for debate. At the time of writing, over 60 initiatives were being lined up for consideration by the parliament. The Ministry of Justice maintains an online platform for citizens’ initiatives.
The Finnish system also allows for citizen-initiated municipal referendums. However, municipal authorities determine how such referendums are conducted and results are non-binding.
Citations:
Dag Anckar, “Finland,” in Bruno Kaufmann and M. D. Waters, eds. Direct Democracy in Europe. Durham, N. C.: Carolina Academic Press, 2004.
Online platform for citizen initiatives; https://www.kansalaisaloite.fi/fi
Henrik Serup Christensen, Maija Karjalainen and Maija Setälä, Kansalaisaloite poliittisen yhdenvertaisuuden näkökulmasta, pp. 435-456 in Kimmo Grönlund and Hanna Wass, eds. Poliittisen osallistumisen eriytyminen, Helsinki: Oikeusministeriö, Selvityksiä ja ohjeita 28, 2016.
While this mechanism does not enable direct citizen participation in public policymaking, a constitutional amendment in 2012 introduced a popular-initiative system. This system requires parliament to consider any petition that receives 50,000 signatures or more within six months. However, citizens do not themselves have the opportunity to vote on the initiative issues, as the right of decision and agenda-setting remains with the parliament. The first initiative to receive enough signatories to be submitted to parliament was on the prohibition of fur farming; it was subsequently rejected. A later initiative concerning same-sex marriage also received a sufficient number of signatories and was approved by the parliament after a heated debate. In 2017, an initiative to repeal this decision received more than 100,000 signatures, but was rejected by parliament. Since the system’s establishment, more than 1,300 initiatives have been brought up, 56 of which have been submitted to the parliament for debate. At the time of writing, over 60 initiatives were being lined up for consideration by the parliament. The Ministry of Justice maintains an online platform for citizens’ initiatives.
The Finnish system also allows for citizen-initiated municipal referendums. However, municipal authorities determine how such referendums are conducted and results are non-binding.
Citations:
Dag Anckar, “Finland,” in Bruno Kaufmann and M. D. Waters, eds. Direct Democracy in Europe. Durham, N. C.: Carolina Academic Press, 2004.
Online platform for citizen initiatives; https://www.kansalaisaloite.fi/fi
Henrik Serup Christensen, Maija Karjalainen and Maija Setälä, Kansalaisaloite poliittisen yhdenvertaisuuden näkökulmasta, pp. 435-456 in Kimmo Grönlund and Hanna Wass, eds. Poliittisen osallistumisen eriytyminen, Helsinki: Oikeusministeriö, Selvityksiä ja ohjeita 28, 2016.
Graph View
To what extent are the media independent from government?
10
9
9
Public and private media are independent from government influence; their independence is institutionally protected and fully respected by the incumbent government.
8
7
6
7
6
The incumbent government largely respects the independence of media. However, there are occasional attempts to exert influence.
5
4
3
4
3
The incumbent government seeks to ensure its political objectives indirectly by influencing the personnel policies, organizational framework or financial resources of public media, and/or the licensing regime/market access for private media.
2
1
1
Major media outlets are frequently influenced by the incumbent government promoting its partisan political objectives. To ensure pro-government media reporting, governmental actors exert direct political pressure and violate existing rules of media regulation or change them to benefit their interests.
Media independence is a matter of course in Finland. Media independence is guaranteed by the Act on the Exercise of Freedom of Expression in Mass Media from 2003, and supported by public and political discourse. A free and pluralist media is considered an important contributor to debate among citizens and the formation of public opinion. Finland has been ranked at or near the top of the Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index since 2009. In 2016, Finland ranked first for the sixth consecutive year. Though the country was ranked third in 2017 and fourth in 2018, it climbed to second place in 2019, trailing behind Norway. Several factors have contributed to this success. Media consumption rates are fairly high in Finland. The rate of media consumption guarantees a strong market and healthy competition, promoting high-quality journalism. In addition, the Council for Mass Media in Finland has successfully managed a system of self-regulation among media outlets. Furthermore, as Finland is one of the least corrupt societies in the world, the government has in general avoided interfering with press freedoms, although a few exceptions to this rule have occurred in recent years.
News coverage of the coronavirus crisis has been credible and trustworthy. No news organization has published any reports whose accuracy could be questioned. On the contrary, news media organizations have proactively debunked coronavirus-related misinformation that has circulated on social media platforms (Heikkilä 2020).
Citations:
“Reporters without Borders, Finland,” https://rsf.org/en/finland
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/supreme_court_upholds_legality_of_hs_journalists_home_search/10920367
News coverage of the coronavirus crisis has been credible and trustworthy. No news organization has published any reports whose accuracy could be questioned. On the contrary, news media organizations have proactively debunked coronavirus-related misinformation that has circulated on social media platforms (Heikkilä 2020).
Citations:
“Reporters without Borders, Finland,” https://rsf.org/en/finland
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/supreme_court_upholds_legality_of_hs_journalists_home_search/10920367
To what extent are the media characterized by an ownership structure that ensures a pluralism of opinions?
10
9
9
Diversified ownership structures characterize both the electronic and print media market, providing a well-balanced pluralism of opinions. Effective anti-monopoly policies and impartial, open public media guarantee a pluralism of opinions.
8
7
6
7
6
Diversified ownership structures prevail in the electronic and print media market. Public media compensate for deficiencies or biases in private media reporting by representing a wider range of opinions.
5
4
3
4
3
Oligopolistic ownership structures characterize either the electronic or the print media market. Important opinions are represented but there are no or only weak institutional guarantees against the predominance of certain opinions.
2
1
1
Oligopolistic ownership structures characterize both the electronic and the print media market. Few companies dominate the media, most programs are biased, and there is evidence that certain opinions are not published or are marginalized.
Finland’s media landscape is pluralistic and includes a variety of newspapers and magazines as well as social media sites. Moreover, the conditions in which Finland’s journalists operate are said to be among the most favorable in the World. In addition, Finland still boasts an impressive newspaper readership, despite a definite decline in circulation numbers in recent years. According to a recent report by Reporters without Borders, Finland ranks fourth in terms of newspaper readers per capita. However, newspapers do face the prospect of long-term decline due to the rise of the electronic media and increasing economic pressures due to a loss of advertising share and increasing costs. Indeed, during the last decade, user-generated content and online social-media platforms have revolutionized the media landscape. As a rule, newspapers are privately owned but publicly subsidized. The most recent Media Monitor Report pointed out that the high level of concentration in the Finnish media market constituted a high risk for media plurality. Although regional newspapers remain comparatively strong, most local newspapers have been assimilated into larger newspaper chains. Internet use is open and unrestricted, with 89% of the population using the internet, and broadband internet access is defined by law as a universal service that must be available to everyone. According to Official Statistics of Finland, the internet has become an established source of information concerning elections. The national broadcasting company, Yleisradio, operates several national and regional television and radio channels, and supplies a broad range of information online. Although state-owned and controlled by a parliamentary council, Yleisradio has generally been viewed as unbiased. Yleisradio is complemented by several private broadcasting companies.
Citations:
http://www.stat.fi/tup/suoluk/suolu_ k__kulttuuri_en.html#newspaper;
Manninen, Wille. “Monitoring Media Pluralism in Europe 2017. Country Report: Finland,” https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/61138/2018_Finland_EN.pdf
https://www.stat.fi/til/sutivi/2018/sutivi_2018_2018-12-04_kat_001_fi.html
Official Statistics of Finland (OSF): Use of information and communications technology by individuals [e-publication]. ISSN=2341-8710. Helsinki: Statistics Finland
Citations:
http://www.stat.fi/tup/suoluk/suolu_ k__kulttuuri_en.html#newspaper;
Manninen, Wille. “Monitoring Media Pluralism in Europe 2017. Country Report: Finland,” https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/61138/2018_Finland_EN.pdf
https://www.stat.fi/til/sutivi/2018/sutivi_2018_2018-12-04_kat_001_fi.html
Official Statistics of Finland (OSF): Use of information and communications technology by individuals [e-publication]. ISSN=2341-8710. Helsinki: Statistics Finland
To what extent can citizens obtain official information?
10
9
9
Legal regulations guarantee free and easy access to official information, contain few, reasonable restrictions, and there are effective mechanisms of appeal and oversight enabling citizens to access information.
8
7
6
7
6
Access to official information is regulated by law. Most restrictions are justified, but access is sometimes complicated by bureaucratic procedures. Existing appeal and oversight mechanisms permit citizens to enforce their right of access.
5
4
3
4
3
Access to official information is partially regulated by law, but complicated by bureaucratic procedures and some poorly justified restrictions. Existing appeal and oversight mechanisms are often ineffective.
2
1
1
Access to official information is not regulated by law; there are many restrictions of access, bureaucratic procedures and no or ineffective mechanisms of enforcement.
The public’s access to government information is in principle unrestricted. In accordance with the Finnish constitution, every Finnish citizen has the right of access to public documents and recordings. This right includes access to documents and recordings in the possession of government authorities, unless their publication has for some compelling reason been restricted by a government act. However, special categories are secret and exempt from release, including documents that relate to foreign affairs, criminal investigations, the police, security services and military intelligence. Such documents are usually kept secret for a period of 25 years, unless otherwise stated by law. One such document, the so-called Tiitinen’s List, continues to be highly controversial. The list was handed over to Finland by West Germany in 1990, and is assumed to contain the names of 18 people who allegedly collaborated with the East German Intelligence and Security Service. However, to date, Finnish authorities have refused to release the document.
Finland was among the first countries to sign the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents in 2009. The 1999 act on the openness of government activities stipulates that people asking for information are not required to provide reasons for their request, and that responses to requests must be made within 14 days. Appeals of any denial can be taken to a higher authority and thereafter to the Administrative Court. The Chancellor of Justice and the Parliamentary Ombudsman can also review the appeal.
In principle, the government of Finland has tried to actively publish information on the COVID-19 pandemic. Up-to-date information on infection rates and their temporal development, the local distribution of infections, information on specific outbreaks, and the indicators upon which the government bases its risk assessments are publicly available, and the data has been communicated in plain language. The government has published information on its crisis management policies. In all of its communication, the government has stressed the scientific basis for its coronavirus actions. Furthermore, the government has encouraged citizens to follow its website, and the website of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), which provide comprehensive and up-to-date information on the coronavirus. The government website contains government decisions, information produced by the ministries on the effects of the coronavirus on different administrative sectors, and topical material on the coronavirus produced by all government ministries (OECD 2020).
Other public authorities and research agencies have also actively produced information on the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. For example, Helsinki Graduate School of Economics established an economic Situation
Room with the aim of supporting rapid decision-making during the coronavirus crisis. The Situation Room consists of leading economists from Helsinki GSE and the VATT Institute for Economic Research, as well as members from several
public authorities. It utilizes data from relevant public and private sources, and produces regular reports for policymakers. The data is collected and organized in close cooperation with Statistics Finland, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, the Bank of Finland, the Finnish Tax Administration, Kela, and other institutions (Helsinki Graduate School of Economics 2020).
Citations:
OECD, 2020. OEDC Survey on the STI Policy Response to Covid-19. Accessed 28.12. 2020.
https://stiplab.github.io/Covid19/Finland.html
Finland was among the first countries to sign the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents in 2009. The 1999 act on the openness of government activities stipulates that people asking for information are not required to provide reasons for their request, and that responses to requests must be made within 14 days. Appeals of any denial can be taken to a higher authority and thereafter to the Administrative Court. The Chancellor of Justice and the Parliamentary Ombudsman can also review the appeal.
In principle, the government of Finland has tried to actively publish information on the COVID-19 pandemic. Up-to-date information on infection rates and their temporal development, the local distribution of infections, information on specific outbreaks, and the indicators upon which the government bases its risk assessments are publicly available, and the data has been communicated in plain language. The government has published information on its crisis management policies. In all of its communication, the government has stressed the scientific basis for its coronavirus actions. Furthermore, the government has encouraged citizens to follow its website, and the website of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), which provide comprehensive and up-to-date information on the coronavirus. The government website contains government decisions, information produced by the ministries on the effects of the coronavirus on different administrative sectors, and topical material on the coronavirus produced by all government ministries (OECD 2020).
Other public authorities and research agencies have also actively produced information on the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. For example, Helsinki Graduate School of Economics established an economic Situation
Room with the aim of supporting rapid decision-making during the coronavirus crisis. The Situation Room consists of leading economists from Helsinki GSE and the VATT Institute for Economic Research, as well as members from several
public authorities. It utilizes data from relevant public and private sources, and produces regular reports for policymakers. The data is collected and organized in close cooperation with Statistics Finland, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, the Bank of Finland, the Finnish Tax Administration, Kela, and other institutions (Helsinki Graduate School of Economics 2020).
Citations:
OECD, 2020. OEDC Survey on the STI Policy Response to Covid-19. Accessed 28.12. 2020.
https://stiplab.github.io/Covid19/Finland.html
Graph View
To what extent does the state respect and protect civil rights and how effectively are citizens protected by courts against infringements of their rights?
10
9
9
All state institutions respect and effectively protect civil rights. Citizens are effectively protected by courts against infringements of their rights. Infringements present an extreme exception.
8
7
6
7
6
The state respects and protects rights, with few infringements. Courts provide protection.
5
4
3
4
3
Despite formal protection, frequent infringements of civil rights occur and court protection often proves ineffective.
2
1
1
State institutions respect civil rights only formally, and civil rights are frequently violated. Court protection is not effective.
Civil rights are widely respected and protected in Finland. Finland is one of three countries that received the maximum aggregate score (100) in the category of political rights and civil liberties in Freedom House’s 2019 Freedom in the World survey. The country’s legal system provides for freedom of speech, which is also respected in practice. Furthermore, Finns enjoy full property rights and freedom of religion, with the government officially recognizing a large number of religious groups. Freedoms of association and assembly are respected in law and practice, while workers have the right to organize, bargain collectively and strike. In November 2014, after long and contentious discussions, parliament voted to provide marriage rights for same-sex couples, and adoption-rights legislation for same-sex couples became effective in March 2017.
On 16 March 2020, in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government declared a national state of emergency that gave the government the authority to restrict people’s fundamental rights. On 15 June 2020, the government stated that the COVID-19 epidemic could be managed using the regular powers available to authorities (Ministry for Social Affairs and Health 2020).
Within the first month of the COVID-19 emergency, Martin Scheinin, a professor of law, identified six distinct problems in the application of emergency powers. These were the lack of parliamentary scrutiny over the declaration of the state of emergency, cabinet confusion over the complicated structure of the Emergency Powers Act and failure to synchronize it with the revised Article 23 of the constitution, the lack of expertise involved, the failure of parliamentary oversight efforts to utilize all available expertise, the risk that international human rights obligations would be neglected, and a number of exceptions and derogations (Scheinin 2020).
Later, in spring 2020, the government controversially declared that people over 70 years old should remain indoors, and it was reported that those breaking the order could face sanctions. However, it was later found that the government had no mandate to issue such an order. During the fall of 2020, the government focused on delegating measures to contain the spread of the virus to regions and municipalities, thereby avoiding the need to declare another state of emergency.
Notwithstanding these issues, popular trust in institutions has remained fairly strong. A think tank, the Finnish Business and Policy Forum (EVA), conducted a survey in June 2020, which investigated the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the level of trust felt by Finns toward 30 different institutions or actors influential in society. A majority of Finns stated that they trusted the government (60%) and the parliament (52%). Trust in the government had increased 33 percentage points compared to a survey made in 2018. Trust in the parliament had increased by 17 percentage points. These were the biggest shifts in trust in the survey’s history, and were possibly generated by a general sense of fear (Finnish Business and Policy Forum 2020).
Citations:
“Freedom House” (https://freedomhouse.org/).
Finnish Business and Policy Forum, 2020. Coronan and Politicial Views. Finnish Business and Policy
Forum (EVA). Accessed, 28.12. 2020. https://www.eva.fi/en/blog/2020/06/11/covid-19-crisis-had-anexceptional-
impact-on-finnish-political-views/
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, 2020. Corona Virus Informations. Accessed, 28.12. 2020.
https://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/information-on-coronavirus/ministry-of-social-affairs-and-health
Scheinin, Martin, 2020: The COVID-19 Emergency in Finland: Best Practice and Problems, VerfBlog,
2020/4/16. Accessed 18.12. 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-covid-19-emergency-in-finland-bestpractice-
and-problems/, DOI: 10.17176/20200416-092101-0.
On 16 March 2020, in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government declared a national state of emergency that gave the government the authority to restrict people’s fundamental rights. On 15 June 2020, the government stated that the COVID-19 epidemic could be managed using the regular powers available to authorities (Ministry for Social Affairs and Health 2020).
Within the first month of the COVID-19 emergency, Martin Scheinin, a professor of law, identified six distinct problems in the application of emergency powers. These were the lack of parliamentary scrutiny over the declaration of the state of emergency, cabinet confusion over the complicated structure of the Emergency Powers Act and failure to synchronize it with the revised Article 23 of the constitution, the lack of expertise involved, the failure of parliamentary oversight efforts to utilize all available expertise, the risk that international human rights obligations would be neglected, and a number of exceptions and derogations (Scheinin 2020).
Later, in spring 2020, the government controversially declared that people over 70 years old should remain indoors, and it was reported that those breaking the order could face sanctions. However, it was later found that the government had no mandate to issue such an order. During the fall of 2020, the government focused on delegating measures to contain the spread of the virus to regions and municipalities, thereby avoiding the need to declare another state of emergency.
Notwithstanding these issues, popular trust in institutions has remained fairly strong. A think tank, the Finnish Business and Policy Forum (EVA), conducted a survey in June 2020, which investigated the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the level of trust felt by Finns toward 30 different institutions or actors influential in society. A majority of Finns stated that they trusted the government (60%) and the parliament (52%). Trust in the government had increased 33 percentage points compared to a survey made in 2018. Trust in the parliament had increased by 17 percentage points. These were the biggest shifts in trust in the survey’s history, and were possibly generated by a general sense of fear (Finnish Business and Policy Forum 2020).
Citations:
“Freedom House” (https://freedomhouse.org/).
Finnish Business and Policy Forum, 2020. Coronan and Politicial Views. Finnish Business and Policy
Forum (EVA). Accessed, 28.12. 2020. https://www.eva.fi/en/blog/2020/06/11/covid-19-crisis-had-anexceptional-
impact-on-finnish-political-views/
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, 2020. Corona Virus Informations. Accessed, 28.12. 2020.
https://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/information-on-coronavirus/ministry-of-social-affairs-and-health
Scheinin, Martin, 2020: The COVID-19 Emergency in Finland: Best Practice and Problems, VerfBlog,
2020/4/16. Accessed 18.12. 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-covid-19-emergency-in-finland-bestpractice-
and-problems/, DOI: 10.17176/20200416-092101-0.
To what extent does the state concede and protect political liberties?
10
9
9
All state institutions concede and effectively protect political liberties.
8
7
6
7
6
All state institutions for the most part concede and protect political liberties. There are only few infringements.
5
4
3
4
3
State institutions concede political liberties but infringements occur regularly in practice.
2
1
1
Political liberties are unsatisfactory codified and frequently violated.
Political liberties are effectively protected in Finland. Finland is one of three countries that received the maximum aggregate score (100) in the category of political rights and civil liberties in Freedom House’s 2021 Freedom in the World survey. Finnish law provides for freedom of speech, and this freedom is upheld in practice. Finns also enjoy freedom of religion, freedom of association and assembly, and the right to organize, bargain collectively and strike. A large majority of workers belong to trade unions, although the share of membership in trade unions has been decreasing. Women enjoy rights and liberties in Finland equal to those of men. Since the criminal code covers ethnic agitation, courts are regularly faced with the delicate task of weighing the principle of freedom of speech against the principle of forbidding hate speech. In September 2018, the Court of Appeal in Turku upheld a ban on the Nordic Resistance Movement, a National Socialist organization, which is also active in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The ban has subsequently been appealed to the Supreme Court of Finland. The constitution guarantees members of the indigenous Sami population, who comprise less than 1% of the population, cultural autonomy and the right to pursue their traditional livelihoods.
How effectively does the state protect against different forms of discrimination?
10
9
9
State institutions effectively protect against and actively prevent discrimination. Cases of discrimination are extremely rare.
8
7
6
7
6
State anti-discrimination protections are moderately successful. Few cases of discrimination are observed.
5
4
3
4
3
State anti-discrimination efforts show limited success. Many cases of discrimination can be observed.
2
1
1
The state does not offer effective protection against discrimination. Discrimination is widespread in the public sector and in society.
Rights of ethnic and religious minorities are as a rule well protected in Finland, and the criminal code provides penalties for anyone who incites violence on racial, national, ethnic or religious grounds. The rights of the Swedish-speaking minority in Finland are widely respected, with Swedish recognized as an official national language, although some segments of the population, primarily represented by the Finns Party, have turned hostile toward Finland’s Swedish-speaking population. The Aland Islands, whose inhabitants speak Swedish, have historically maintained an extensive autonomy and a home-rule parliament as well as one permanent seat in the national legislature. The Sami population, comprising approximately 10,000 individuals, was granted self-government in the Sami Homeland with regard to language and culture in 1995. Finland has often been seen as a forerunner concerning its efforts to maintain an effective minority-protection policy. Cases of discrimination are rather few, although people with an immigrant background are more likely to encounter discrimination. Roma individuals, who make up a small proportion of the population, are marginalized. The Finns Party has been accused of encouraging discrimination against ethnic minorities and asylum-seekers.
Graph View
To what extent do government and administration act on the basis of and in accordance with legal provisions to provide legal certainty?
10
9
9
Government and administration act predictably, on the basis of and in accordance with legal provisions. Legal regulations are consistent and transparent, ensuring legal certainty.
8
7
6
7
6
Government and administration rarely make unpredictable decisions. Legal regulations are consistent, but leave a large scope of discretion to the government or administration.
5
4
3
4
3
Government and administration sometimes make unpredictable decisions that go beyond given legal bases or do not conform to existing legal regulations. Some legal regulations are inconsistent and contradictory.
2
1
1
Government and administration often make unpredictable decisions that lack a legal basis or ignore existing legal regulations. Legal regulations are inconsistent, full of loopholes and contradict each other.
The rule of law is a basic pillar of Finnish society. When Sweden ceded Finland to Russia in 1809, the strict observation of prevailing Swedish laws and legal regulations became one of the most important tools for avoiding and circumventing Russian interference in Finnish affairs. From this emerged a political culture that prioritizes legal certainty, condemns any conflation of public and private interest, and prevents public officeholders from abusing their position for private interests.
During the state of emergency in 2020, the primary modes of contacting the judicial authorities were telephone, email and electronic services. Agencies in the Ministry of Justice’s administrative branch continued to inform the public about current issues in their areas of responsibility and the level of preparedness in their respective sectors. Courts postponed hearings and canceled some already scheduled hearings. These changes in the operating environment lengthened the average duration of proceedings (Ministry of Justice, 2020).
As outlined in Martin Scheinin’s article (see “Civil Rights”), the problem with declaring the state of emergency in Finland was that there was no parliamentary scrutiny of the decision. The cabinet, acting jointly with the president of the republic, declared that Finland was in a double emergency: a health emergency and an economic emergency. The emergency declaration itself was not reviewed by parliament, but when the cabinet issued a decree to use specific powers under the Emergency Powers Act (EPA), this decree was subject to parliamentary scrutiny (Scheinin 2020).
Finland does not have a Constitutional Court, but does have a parliamentary constitutional committee that consists of politicians and in which the government has a majority. As outlined in Finnish legislation, the Constitutional Law Committee (CLC) of the parliament has reviewed the constitutional compatibility of special legislation and government decrees. The CLC highlighted shortcomings in the government’s compliance with the EPA.
The chancellor of justice is tasked with scrutinizing the legality of law reforms proposed by the government before they are debated in parliament. During the COVID-19 crisis, the issue of the independence of the chancellor of justice was raised. However, among legal scholars there is a “consensus that the principles of democratic decision-making have been respected in the handling of the pandemic, as parliamentary oversight functions well, and the parliament still wields the highest legislative power in Finland” (Kimmel and Ballardini, 2020). Most of the measures implemented to contain the spread of the virus in Finland took the form of recommendations (e.g., regulations concerning the right to assembly, contact restrictions) (Tiirinki et al. 2020).
Citations:
Finnish Business and Policy Forum, 2020. Coronan and Politicial Views. Finnish Business and Policy
Forum (EVA). Accessed, 28.12. 2020. https://www.eva.fi/en/blog/2020/06/11/covid-19-crisis-had-anexceptional-
impact- on-finnish-political-views/
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, 2020. Corona Virus Informations. Accessed, 28.12. 2020.
https://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/information-on-coronavirus/ministry-of-social-affairs-and-health
Kimmel, Kaisa-Maria and Ballardini, Rosa Maria, 2020. Restrictions in the Name of Health During
COVID-19 in Finland. Harvard Law Blog. Accessed 11.1. 2021.
https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/14/finland-global-responses-covid19/
Scheinin, Martin, 2020: The COVID-19 Emergency in Finland: Best Practice and Problems, VerfBlog,
2020/4/16. Accessed 18.12. 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-covid-19-emergency-in-finland-bestpractice-
and-problems/, DOI: 10.17176/20200416-092101-0.
Tiirinki H, Tynkkynen LK, Sovala M, et al. COVID-19 pandemic in Finland – Preliminary analysis on
health system response and economic consequences. Health Policy Technol. 2020;9(4):649-662. doi:
10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.08.005
During the state of emergency in 2020, the primary modes of contacting the judicial authorities were telephone, email and electronic services. Agencies in the Ministry of Justice’s administrative branch continued to inform the public about current issues in their areas of responsibility and the level of preparedness in their respective sectors. Courts postponed hearings and canceled some already scheduled hearings. These changes in the operating environment lengthened the average duration of proceedings (Ministry of Justice, 2020).
As outlined in Martin Scheinin’s article (see “Civil Rights”), the problem with declaring the state of emergency in Finland was that there was no parliamentary scrutiny of the decision. The cabinet, acting jointly with the president of the republic, declared that Finland was in a double emergency: a health emergency and an economic emergency. The emergency declaration itself was not reviewed by parliament, but when the cabinet issued a decree to use specific powers under the Emergency Powers Act (EPA), this decree was subject to parliamentary scrutiny (Scheinin 2020).
Finland does not have a Constitutional Court, but does have a parliamentary constitutional committee that consists of politicians and in which the government has a majority. As outlined in Finnish legislation, the Constitutional Law Committee (CLC) of the parliament has reviewed the constitutional compatibility of special legislation and government decrees. The CLC highlighted shortcomings in the government’s compliance with the EPA.
The chancellor of justice is tasked with scrutinizing the legality of law reforms proposed by the government before they are debated in parliament. During the COVID-19 crisis, the issue of the independence of the chancellor of justice was raised. However, among legal scholars there is a “consensus that the principles of democratic decision-making have been respected in the handling of the pandemic, as parliamentary oversight functions well, and the parliament still wields the highest legislative power in Finland” (Kimmel and Ballardini, 2020). Most of the measures implemented to contain the spread of the virus in Finland took the form of recommendations (e.g., regulations concerning the right to assembly, contact restrictions) (Tiirinki et al. 2020).
Citations:
Finnish Business and Policy Forum, 2020. Coronan and Politicial Views. Finnish Business and Policy
Forum (EVA). Accessed, 28.12. 2020. https://www.eva.fi/en/blog/2020/06/11/covid-19-crisis-had-anexceptional-
impact- on-finnish-political-views/
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, 2020. Corona Virus Informations. Accessed, 28.12. 2020.
https://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/information-on-coronavirus/ministry-of-social-affairs-and-health
Kimmel, Kaisa-Maria and Ballardini, Rosa Maria, 2020. Restrictions in the Name of Health During
COVID-19 in Finland. Harvard Law Blog. Accessed 11.1. 2021.
https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/14/finland-global-responses-covid19/
Scheinin, Martin, 2020: The COVID-19 Emergency in Finland: Best Practice and Problems, VerfBlog,
2020/4/16. Accessed 18.12. 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-covid-19-emergency-in-finland-bestpractice-
and-problems/, DOI: 10.17176/20200416-092101-0.
Tiirinki H, Tynkkynen LK, Sovala M, et al. COVID-19 pandemic in Finland – Preliminary analysis on
health system response and economic consequences. Health Policy Technol. 2020;9(4):649-662. doi:
10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.08.005
To what extent do independent courts control whether government and administration act in conformity with the law?
10
9
9
Independent courts effectively review executive action and ensure that the government and administration act in conformity with the law.
8
7
6
7
6
Independent courts usually manage to control whether the government and administration act in conformity with the law.
5
4
3
4
3
Courts are independent, but often fail to ensure legal compliance.
2
1
1
Courts are biased for or against the incumbent government and lack effective control.
The predominance of the rule of law has been somewhat weakened by the lack of a Constitutional Court in Finland. The need for such a court has been discussed at times, but left-wing parties in particular have historically blocked proposals for the creation of such a court. Instead, the parliament’s Constitutional Law Committee has assumed the position taken in other countries by a Constitutional Court. The implication of this is that parliament is controlled by a kind of inner-parliament, an arrangement that constitutes a less than convincing compensation for a regular Constitutional Court. In addition, although courts are independent in Finland, they do not decide on the constitutionality or the conformity with law of acts of government or the public administration. Instead, the supreme supervisor of legality in Finland is the Office of the Chancellor of Justice. Together with the parliamentary ombudsman, this office monitors authorities’ compliance with the law and the legality of the official acts of the government, its members and the president of the republic. The chancellor is also charged with supervising the legal behavior of courts, authorities and civil servants.
Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, parliamentary oversight came under pressure in Finland. As outlined in an OECD report, the operations of the legislature were threatened by health and safety concerns, and the government asked the legislature to accommodate swift policy action, either through faster budget procedures or by improvising new ones (OECD 2020).
The government cabinet, jointly with the president of the republic, declared that Finland was in a double emergency: a health emergency and an economic emergency. The emergency declaration itself was not reviewed by parliament, but when the cabinet issued a decree to use specific powers under the Emergency Powers Act (EPA) the decree was subject to scrutiny (Scheinin 2020). However, as outlined in Finnish legislation, the Constitutional Law Committee (CLC) of the parliament carefully assessed whether the special legislation and government decrees were compatible with the constitution.
Most of the measures to contain the spread of the virus in Finland took the form of recommendations (e.g., regulations concerning the right of assembly, and contact restrictions) (Tiirinki et al. 2020). However, at times, there were problems in communicating these recommendations. For example, the government may have exceeded its mandate when it ordered elderly citizens to remain indoors. When this oversight was discovered, the government argued that it had issued a recommendation, not an order. As public trust in authorities is high, Finnish people tend to take recommendations quite literally.
Citations:
“Hallituksen painostus jyräsi oikeuskanslerin pyrkimykset korjata ongelmallisia lakiesityksiä – oikeustieteen professorit tyrmistyivät”; http://www.hs.fi/politiikka/art-2000005011266.html
Kimmel, Kaisa-Maria and Ballardini, Rosa Maria, 2020. Restrictions in the Name of Health During
COVID-19 in Finland. Harvard Law Blog. Accessed 11.1. 2021.
https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/14/finland-global-responses-covi d19/
OECD, 2020. Policy Responses to Corona. Accessed, 28.12 2020. https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policyresponses/
legislative-budget-oversight-of-emergency-responses-experiences-during-the-coronavirus-covid-
19-pandemic-ba4f2ab5/
Scheinin, Martin, 2020: The COVID-19 Emergency in Finland: Best Practice and Problems, VerfBlog,
2020/4/16. Accessed 18.12. 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-covid-19-emergency-in-finland-bestpractice-
and-p roblems/, DOI: 10.17176/20200416-092101-0.
Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, parliamentary oversight came under pressure in Finland. As outlined in an OECD report, the operations of the legislature were threatened by health and safety concerns, and the government asked the legislature to accommodate swift policy action, either through faster budget procedures or by improvising new ones (OECD 2020).
The government cabinet, jointly with the president of the republic, declared that Finland was in a double emergency: a health emergency and an economic emergency. The emergency declaration itself was not reviewed by parliament, but when the cabinet issued a decree to use specific powers under the Emergency Powers Act (EPA) the decree was subject to scrutiny (Scheinin 2020). However, as outlined in Finnish legislation, the Constitutional Law Committee (CLC) of the parliament carefully assessed whether the special legislation and government decrees were compatible with the constitution.
Most of the measures to contain the spread of the virus in Finland took the form of recommendations (e.g., regulations concerning the right of assembly, and contact restrictions) (Tiirinki et al. 2020). However, at times, there were problems in communicating these recommendations. For example, the government may have exceeded its mandate when it ordered elderly citizens to remain indoors. When this oversight was discovered, the government argued that it had issued a recommendation, not an order. As public trust in authorities is high, Finnish people tend to take recommendations quite literally.
Citations:
“Hallituksen painostus jyräsi oikeuskanslerin pyrkimykset korjata ongelmallisia lakiesityksiä – oikeustieteen professorit tyrmistyivät”; http://www.hs.fi/politiikka/art-2000005011266.html
Kimmel, Kaisa-Maria and Ballardini, Rosa Maria, 2020. Restrictions in the Name of Health During
COVID-19 in Finland. Harvard Law Blog. Accessed 11.1. 2021.
https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/14/finland-global-responses-covi d19/
OECD, 2020. Policy Responses to Corona. Accessed, 28.12 2020. https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policyresponses/
legislative-budget-oversight-of-emergency-responses-experiences-during-the-coronavirus-covid-
19-pandemic-ba4f2ab5/
Scheinin, Martin, 2020: The COVID-19 Emergency in Finland: Best Practice and Problems, VerfBlog,
2020/4/16. Accessed 18.12. 2020. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-covid-19-emergency-in-finland-bestpractice-
and-p roblems/, DOI: 10.17176/20200416-092101-0.
To what extent does the process of appointing (supreme or constitutional court) justices guarantee the independence of the judiciary?
10
9
9
Justices are appointed in a cooperative appointment process with special majority requirements.
8
7
6
7
6
Justices are exclusively appointed by different bodies with special majority requirements or in a cooperative selection process without special majority requirements.
5
4
3
4
3
Justices are exclusively appointed by different bodies without special majority requirements.
2
1
1
All judges are appointed exclusively by a single body irrespective of other institutions.
There are three levels of courts: local, appellate and supreme. The final court of appeal is the Supreme Court, and there is also a Supreme Administrative Court and an Ombuds office. The judiciary is independent from the executive and legislative branches. Supreme Court judges are appointed to permanent positions by the president of the republic. They are not subject to political influence. Supreme Court justices appoint lower-court judges. The ombudsman is an independent official elected by parliament. The ombudsman and deputy ombudsman investigate complaints by citizens and conduct investigations. While formally transparent, the appointment processes do not receive much media coverage.
To what extent are public officeholders prevented from abusing their position for private interests?
10
9
9
Legal, political and public integrity mechanisms effectively prevent public officeholders from abusing their positions.
8
7
6
7
6
Most integrity mechanisms function effectively and provide disincentives for public officeholders willing to abuse their positions.
5
4
3
4
3
Some integrity mechanisms function, but do not effectively prevent public officeholders from abusing their positions.
2
1
1
Public officeholders can exploit their offices for private gain as they see fit without fear of legal consequences or adverse publicity.
The overall level of corruption in Finland is low, with the country offering a solid example of how the consolidation of advanced democratic institutions may lead to the reduction of corruption. Transparency International’s 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index ranked Finland at third place out of 180 countries. The country was also ranked third in 2017 and 2016. Several individual mechanisms contribute to the Finnish success, including a strict auditing of state spending; new and more efficient regulations over party financing; legal provisions that criminalize the acceptance of brides; full access by the media and the public to relevant information; public asset declarations; and consistent legal prosecution of corrupt acts. However, the various integrity mechanisms still leave some room for potential abuse, and a 2014 European Commission report emphasized the need to make public-procurement decisions and election funding more transparent. It is also evident that positions in Finland are still filled through political appointment. Whereas only about 5% of citizens are party members, two-thirds of the state and municipal public servants are party members. Recently, several charges of political corruption involving bribery and campaign financing have been brought to light and have attracted media attention.
Citations:
Hung-En Sung, “Democracy and Political Corruption: A Cross-National Comparison,” Crime, Law & Social Change, Vol. 41, 2004, 179-194.
Transparency International, “Corruption Perceptions Index 2018,”
https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018
Citations:
Hung-En Sung, “Democracy and Political Corruption: A Cross-National Comparison,” Crime, Law & Social Change, Vol. 41, 2004, 179-194.
Transparency International, “Corruption Perceptions Index 2018,”
https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018