Finland / District court of Itä-Uusimaa / 19/116648; R 18/1120/707

Country

Finland

Title

Finland / District court of Itä-Uusimaa / 19/116648; R 18/1120/707

View full Case

Year

2019

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

Incident(s) concerned/related

Incitement to violence or hatred

Related Bias motivation

Religion
Race/Ethnicity

Groups affected

Muslims

Court/Body type

National Court

Court/Body

The District Court of Itä-Uusimaa (Itä-Uudemaan käräjäoikeus / Östra Nylands tingsrätt)

Key facts of the case

The defendant (Mr Pietarinen) had published several Facebook posts between April 2016 and September 2017. In his posts, the defendant attacked Islam as a religion and Muslims as a group. For example, he described Islam as “cancer” and ”crime against humanity”. He claimed that Muslims were “criminals”, “rapists”, “murderers” and “terrorists” and called prophet Muhammad “a pervert and a pedophile”. The defendant held that he had the right to express his opinions, and in doing so, use also shocking and provocative language.

Main reasoning/argumentation

The court applied the relevant provisions in the Criminal Code (incitement to hatred and breach of the sanctity of religion) in the light of the right to freedom of expression as provided for in the Constitution Act and the ECHR. The court found that the defendant had in his posts threatened, defamed and insulted Muslims on the basis of their religion. He had overstepped the limits of acceptable exaggeration and provocation tolerated under the right to freedom of expression.

Freedom of expression allows for the criticism of all religions. The defendant’s statements had targeted both at Muslims as a religious community and their prophet. The court held that the statements were made for the purpose of offending and in order to defame or desecrate what is held sacred by a religious community.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

Freedom of expression allows for a certain degree of exaggeration and provocation and reasonable criticism of all religions. However, threatening, insulting, defaming or desecrating a group of people on the basis of their religion is punishable.

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The defendant was found guilty of incitement to hatred and breach of sanctity of religion. He was sentenced a joint day fine for both offences which amounted to 80 day fines (480 euros). The court also ordered that the Facebook posts that had been found to be illegal, were to be deleted.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

"Pietarisen syyksi luettava kiihottamisrikos on islaminuskoisten ihmisten ihmisarvoa loukkaavana verrattain vakava. Kirjoitukset pitävät sisällään uhkauksia ja uhkauksenomaista vihan lietsomista muslimeja kohtaan. Kirjoitukset ovat luonteeltaan rasistisia ja kokonaisuutena niitä on pidettävä hyvin vahingollisina, ja kun otetaan huomioon se, että kirjoituksia on ollut pitkän ajan kuluessa useita, osoittavat ne Pietarisessa korostunutta syyllisyyttä."

"The act of incitement to hatred which Pietarinen has committed is of a relatively serious nature because it violates the human dignity of Muslim people. The posts contain threats and similar acts of incitement to hatred towards Muslims. The posts are racist in their character and as a whole they are to be considered very harmful. Also, the fact that there have been several posts during a long period of time, is strong proof of Pietarinen’s guilt."

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.