Page 404 [404]
OCR
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 +
