Thanks to all foreign readers. It seems that there is a huge interest in the Finnish legal system, especially in U.S.A. and Russia.
I hope that my blog will bring some light to the dark side of the Finnish judiciary better than
Transparency International, which does not take care of the hidden
corruption of the civil service of the EU. Neither is the Finnish government interested in preventing corruption until they are obliged because of public pressure. Many illegal practices by Finnish politicians and authorities have been published in Finnish newspapers and magazines.
The worst thing is that more and more officials who should be trusted can be bought or use their "power" in bad decisions. Maybe not by money, but with some other benefits that will not leave a dirty trace. When
an illegal decision is made, an official protects another official, the
judge protects another judge, the doctor protects another doctor, and
so on. The Brotherhood, through all its existence, conceals an illicit decision or business.
In the early days it was said that Finns are the most honest people and nation. In our childhood, we could leave the door open at night, but no longer. Modern culture has also brought a vast crime here too. This is what I really would not like to see in our civil service, even though it is a must today.
This case has been written in a nut shell in this Blog a year ago but to bring it closer to new readers I'll paste it here as well.
THE CASE BREAFLY
Stealing of property is legal in Finland.
Helsinki Court of Appeal has broken the personal property rights of a
private company in Helsinki.
South Import Ltd has been sentenced to lose its rights to use its legal
property - premises it legally owns (by the articles of association) -
and to give over the tenure of the shares of the said property to the
housing company.
The law of protection of property is over 2000
year old Roman law. "One who does not own anything can not manage
anything." This has been written in Finnish Constitution 15
§ in a shape: "the property of every citizen is protected". Maybe legal authorities cannot read?
This violation of property rights has been accepted by the Finnish Supreme Court.
There have been several violations of the EIS (ECHR) articles in the judgement:
Article
6 (1) The Helsinki Court of Appeal wasn't impartial. The judge can be
proved to have personal interests in the housing company.
Article 13 Even though the case has been put through several courts, the
verdicts have been more or less ostensible, insufficiently argumented
and clearly demonstrated the fact, that the officials neglected to read
through the background material provided for the trial.
Article 14 Housing shareholders were not treated equally.
Article 26 Continuous ownership right violation. Authorities have not
taken measures in order to restore the possession of the property to its
rightful owner.
The legal process has taken 37 years and the judgment is not based on the law.
There
is the positive anticipatory decision of European Court of Human Rights
but there is no way to put it into process in Finland. Finnish courts
can do what they please in case of the violation of the ownership and
thus are in violation of basic human rights.
Hannu Lehikoinen
Managing director of South Import Ltd.
Finland
e-mail: hannu.lehikoinen@etelatuonti.fi
Index to the material (in Finnish)>
EIS Euroopan IhmisoikeusSopimus = European Court of Human Rights >
Edited and published by Hannu Kuukkanen
