< Back to Compendium

1. Source of the legal provision

Chapter 11, Section 10 and Section 10a of the Criminal Code [Rikoslaki] as amended by the 511/2011 Law amending the Criminal Code [511/2011 Lakirikoslain muuttamisesta]. Available in the original language via: Finlex; <https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/1889/18890039001#L11>

2. Legal provision in English

Chapter 11, Section 10: Agitation against a population group A person who makes available to the public or otherwise disseminates among the public or keeps available to the public information, an opinion or another message where a certain group is threatened, defamed or insulted on the basis of its race, colour, birth, national or ethnic origin, religion or belief, sexual orientation or disability or on another comparable basis shall be sentenced for agitation against a population group to a fine or to imprisonment for at most two years.   Chapter 11, Section 10a: Aggravated agitation against a population group If agitation against a population group involves exhortation or enticement
  • to genocide or preparation of genocide, a crime against humanity, an aggravated crime against humanity, a war crime, an aggravated war crime, murder, or manslaughter committed with a terrorist intent, or
  • to serious violence other than that referred to in paragraph 1 so that the act clearly endangers public order and security,
and the agitation against a population group is also aggravated when assessed as a whole, the perpetrator shall be sentenced for aggravated agitation against a population group to imprisonment for at least four months and at most four years.

3. Legal provision in the original language

Luku 11, 10 §: Kiihottaminen kansanryhmää vastaan Joka asettaa yleisön saataville tai muutoin yleisön keskuuteen levittää tai pitää yleisön saatavilla tiedon, mielipiteen tai muun viestin, jossa uhataan, panetellaan tai solvataan jotakin ryhmää rodun, ihonvärin, syntyperän, kansallisen tai etnisen alkuperän, uskonnon tai vakaumuksen, seksuaalisen suuntautumisen tai vammaisuuden perusteella taikka niihin rinnastettavalla muulla perusteella, on tuomittava kiihottamisesta kansanryhmää vastaan sakkoon tai vankeuteen enintään kahdeksi vuodeksi.   Luku 11, 10 a §: Törkeä kiihottaminen kansanryhmää vastaan Jos kiihottamisessa kansanryhmää vastaan kehotetaan tai houkutellaan
  • joukkotuhontaan tai sen valmisteluun, rikokseen ihmisyyttä vastaan, törkeään rikokseen ihmisyyttä vastaan, sotarikokseen, törkeään sotarikokseen, murhaan tai terroristisessa tarkoituksessa tehtyyn tappoon tai
  • muuhun kuin 1 kohdassa tarkoitettuun vakavaan väkivaltaan siten, että teolla selvästi vaarannetaan yleistä järjestystä ja turvallisuutta
ja kiihottaminen kansanryhmää vastaan on myös kokonaisuutena arvostellen törkeä, rikoksentekijä on tuomittava törkeästä kiihottamisesta kansanryhmää vastaan vankeuteen vähintään neljäksi kuukaudeksi ja enintään neljäksi vuodeksi.

4. Key points

  • Finland has no specific legislation banning Holocaust denial or general genocide denial, therefore falling short of the requirements of the EU Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA (hereafter ‘EU FD 2008’).
  • However, the exhortation or enticement to genocide can serve as an aggravating factor in cases of hate speech and incitement against a population group, particularly when an individual disseminates, makes available, or shares information, opinions, or messages that threaten, defame, or insult a person based on their national, racial, ethnic, or other group membership.
  • The possible sanctions for simple agitation include a fine or imprisonment for at most two years.
  • At present, Finland is exploring possibilities to ban Holocaust denial and certain symbols (including National Socialist and Communist symbols).
  • Concurrently, Finland is subject to an infringement procedure for failing to criminalize specific forms of hate speech, namely the public condoning, denial, or gross trivialization of international crimes and the Holocaust – thereby not fully transposing the EU FD 2008.

5. Background

Finland has no specific Holocaust or Genocide denial ban: however, some provisions of the Criminal Code can be applied in the case of Holocaust denial – such as from Chapter 11 “War crimes and offences against humanity”. “Hate speech” is prohibited in Finland, and defined in the Chapter 11 Section 10 of the Criminal Code as “information, an opinion or another message where a certain group is threatened, defamed or insulted on the basis of its race, colour, birth, national or ethnic origin, religion or belief, sexual orientation or disability or on another comparable basis”.[1] Agitation is punishable with a fine or up to two years in prison, and aggravated agitation is punishable by imprisonment of between four months to four years. A possible form of aggravated agitation is the incitement to genocide (Chapter 11, Section 10a (1) of the Criminal Code). Finland has neither specific legislation aimed at controlling ownership, display, purchase, and import, nor the export of Nazi flags, or other symbols or symbolic objects of other dictatorships. The lack of specific denial legislation has resulted in an infringement proceeding by the European Commission, which is still ongoing.[2] It is also against this background that there have been attempts to specifically ban Holocaust denial in Finland in recent years. In 2023, the four parties comprising Finland’s coalition government unveiled their joint statement on eradicating racism and promoting equality within Finnish society at a press conference. The statement was delivered in the context of racism and far-right scandals involving ministers from the right-wing populist Finns Party. The government then appointed a working group tasked with proposing concrete measures to tackle racism and discrimination.[3] The working group proposed the following measures: to criminalise Holocaust denial, to test and discuss the possibility of outlawing the political use of certain symbols (including the swastika as used by Nazi Germany as well as the hammer and sickle that appeared on the former Soviet Union symbolics). State Secretary Risto Artjoki who chaired the working group noted that such a ban was “legally challenging”, and that it was not possible to draft a proposed change in legislation on so tight a schedule as the working group had originally intended.

6. Application

To the best of our knowledge, no convictions for Holocaust denial, based on Finland’s hate speech provisions, have been adjudicated. However, Finland has taken certain legal steps to ban neo-Nazi groups and movements. Following a series of court battles that began in 2017, the Supreme Court of Finland upheld in 2020 a ban on the neo-Nazi group “Nordic Resistance Movement” (PVL). This made Finland, which has been a member state of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) since 2010, the first to ban this group in Northern Europe.[4] The group, which sought to establish a National Socialist state, was linked to a number of violent incidents in Norway, and used tactics that involved the spreading of hate speech. The Court ruled that its activities constituted a misuse of the rights afforded under the freedoms of speech and assembly. Noting that the group’s activities were “significantly contrary to law,” the Finnish Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the two lower courts.[5]

7. Controversies

Finland has a history of swastikas used in government and military flags. Flags containing the symbol can be found in the Finnish Air Force, Defence Forces, certain regiments of the army, and flight schools. The recent discussions on memory laws in Finland (especially in 2023) intensified due to  racism issues. Since Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s (NCP) right-wing government came into office on 20 June 2023, it has been involved in a series of scandals. The controversies have mostly revolved around the past activities and writings of Finns Party parliament members, all of whom have taken on ministerial positions within the Orpo administration. These scandals included, for instance, Deputy Prime Minister Riikka Purra’s racist (against black and muslim people) and violent blog comments. Furthermore, the economic minister, Vilhelm Junnila, had to resign after ten days in office after making jokes about Nazism and attending a far-right event with links to neo-Nazis in 2019.[6] The attempts in Finland to draft and adopt new memory laws, such as a Holocaust denial ban, have received criticism too. They are sometimes seen as threatening freedom of speech. Critics claim that, in political contexts, labelling certain opinions and statements “hate speech” can be used to silence unfavourable or critical opinions, and suppress debate. Certain politicians and society consider the term “hate speech” problematic because of disagreements over its definition.[7]

8. Further reading

  • Tom Gullberg, ‘The Holocaust as History Culture in Finland’, in Helle Bjerg, Claudia Lenz, Erik Thorstensen (eds), Historicizing the Uses of the Past (Bielefeld, Germany | 2011).
  • Claudia Chiappa, ‘Scandal-ridden Finnish government presents anti-racism agenda’ (Politico, 31 August 2023)
<https://www.politico.eu/article/finland-government-adopts-anti-racism-statement-after-months-of-racism-scandals/>.
  • ‘Government statement to Parliament on promoting equality, gender equality and non-discrimination in Finnish society’, Finish government (2023)
<https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/165112/VN_Statement_31082023_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y>. [1] Finland’s Criminal Code in English: <https://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039_20210433.pdf> [2] European Commission, February infringement package: key decisions, 18 February 2021, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_21_441; an additional formal notice was issued on 26 January 2023. [3] ‘Government statement to Parliament on promoting equality, gender equality and non-discrimination in Finnish society’ Finnish government, (2023) <https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/165112/VN_Statement_31082023_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y>. [4] ‘Finland Supreme Court bans Neo-Nazi group’ (The official website of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), 24 September 2020 <https://holocaustremembrance.com/news/finland-supreme-court-bans-neo-nazi-group>. [5] See Ibid; ‘Finnish top court bans Finland’s main neo-Nazi group’, AP News, September 22, 2020, <https://apnews.com/general-news-959402562fc46f29ac4a7fbf21fa6615>. [6] See A. Lapin, ‘After leading minister joked about Nazis, Finland moves to criminalize Holocaust denial’, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, August 31, 2023, <https://www.jta.org/2023/08/31/global/finlands-prime-minister-hopes-to-criminalize-holocaust-denial-after-a-deputy-joked-about-nazis>; ‘Finland to criminalise Holocaust denial, probe banning swastika use’, Yle News, 31 8 2023, <https://yle.fi/a/74-20047962>; ‘APN Podcast: Finland’s stormy summer of political scandals’, Yle News, 10 8 2023, <https://yle.fi/a/74-20044700>; J. Henley, ‘Finnish far-right finance minister accused of racist online comments’, The Guardian, 11 Jul 2023, <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/11/finnish-far-right-finance-minister-riikka-purra-accused-of-racist-online-comments>. [7] See S. Bagman, ‘Finnish reactions to the Holocaust’ [Dec. 2012], Journal for the Study of Antisemitism, vol. 4, no. 2; J/ Korpela, ‘The law should not determine what is true in history’, Helsinki Times, 6 September 2023, <https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/columns/columns/viewpoint/24118-the-law-should-not-determine-what-is-true-in-history.html>.
Scroll to Top