Finland's Non-Discrimination Ombudsman has called for the country to improve the legal protections for victims of intimate partner violence.
An investigation by the National Prosecution Authority examined how district courts handle domestic violence cases. Its review found that during sentencing in more than half of the cases, judges did not take into account that the perpetrators and victims had a close relationship.
But that is not in line with the Istanbul Convention. That is a Council of Europe treaty stating that, among other things, violent crimes against women and domestic violence are aggravated crimes that should be considered more serious in the eyes of the law — and lead to more severe penalties.
According to the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman, Rainer Hiltunen, the situation reflects that there is a "clear gap" in the criminal code.
The Ombudsman reviewed 80 domestic violence criminal cases heard by district courts across the country. It was found that the majority involved violence directed towards a partner — and the perpetrator was usually male.
Around 94 percent of the reviewed cases resulted in convictions. Most often the perpetrators were issued a fine.
It was found that in 55 percent of cases examined by the Ombudsman, the district courts' sentencing justifications did not mention that the violence occurred between people in a close relationship.
In 45 percent of the cases, the sentencing justifications did note that victims and perpetrators were in a relationship. But such scenarios rarely led to harsher punishments.
According to the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman, violence against a current or former partner should always carry increased criminal liability — compared to violence directed towards a stranger, for example.
"There is a clear gap in the criminal code that must be addressed. The aggravating circumstances mentioned in the Istanbul Convention must be clearly prescribed in the criminal code," Hiltunen said in a press release.
