Seite 404 [404]
RAIMO LAHTI
The legality principle includes, inter alia, the requirement of certainty of
criminal law. The aim to limit judicial discretion was predominant in the Finnish
criminal law reform since the 1970s. While the Swedish Criminal Code of 1965
had been criticized for using overly vague crime definitions, the Finnish law
drafters sought to describe the offences as clearly as possible, for example by
reducing the use of value-laden or otherwise ambiguous terms in the definition
of the crime. On the other hand, the objective of more precise crime definitions
collides with another aim of the Finnish reform work, namely the effort to
synthetize crime definitions, in other words to cast them in a more abstract form
(as in the crime definition on ‘Causing of danger’ or the definitional elements of
‘Debtor’s offences’; PC 21:13 and chapter 39). A reasonable balance between these
conflicting aims was sought. An accommodation was also required between the
principles of comprehensibility and certainty. Although clarity is a function of
both comprehensibility and certainty of language, the maximization of one may
be detrimental to the other.
Other means to limit judicial discretion have also been used. Thus, in many
cases the existing offences have been split into subcategories (e.g. basic assault,
aggravated assault, and petty assault), and the definition of an aggravated offence
is based on an exhaustive list of criteria (however, a milder evaluation is always
discretionary). In addition, the number and scope of sentencing scales (punishment
latitudes) have been generally reduced.
In accordance with the legality principle and the values behind it, the basic
concepts and principles governing the general preconditions for criminal liability
are defined in the revised general part of the Penal Code to a greater extent than
in the Penal Code’s original form. For instance, the preconditions for liability for
omissions as well as the concepts of intent, negligence, and mistake are defined in
the new Code (chapters 3—4; 515/2003), unlike in the original Penal Code of 1889."
The significance of the legality principle was reinforced during the preparatory
work by the constitutional reform (chapter 2, section 8, Constitution’).
One way to strengthen the legality principle was the effort to reduce and
specify the use of the so-called blanket provision technique. For instance, the
new provision on the legality principle in the revised Constitution obliges the
legislature and courts to take a strict course of action in this respect, because
the acts must be punishable under an Act of Parliament in force at the time
when they were committed. This new constitutional provision on the legality
principle, according to its travaux préparatoires, and the tradition of transforming
1 See the following provisions in the revised PC 3:3; 3:6-7; 4:1-3.
?° An unofficial English translation of the Constitution of Finland (731/1999), as it was in
force in 2011 (1112/2011), is available on the website of the Ministry of Justice: https://www.
finlex. fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1999/en19990731_20111112.pdf.
+ 402 +