This article examines intimate partnership violence as a question of criminal justice policy in Finland, and contributes to criminological discussions regarding oft-stated connections between the politicization of the victim, the treatment of offenders, and repressive criminal justice policies. In this discussion, legislation aiming to regulate and prevent violence against women has often been utilized as an example of such punitive policies. Although criminal policies in Nordic countries differ significantly from more punitive Anglophone policies, punitive tendencies, it has been argued, have increased in the former, too. This article analyzes the change in legal regulations and the criminal political status of intimate partner violence in Finland between 1990 and 2004, while examining the juxtaposition of victims and offenders alongside repressive demands.
According to the Finnish Solicitor General Police did not misfired on Homice in Pernaja. Police promises more prompt interventions. (1996, March8). Helsingin Sanomat: http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003514110.html.
2.
AnttilaI. (1972). Punishment versus treatment—Is there a third alternative?Abstracts on Criminology and Penology, 12, 287-290.
3.
AnttilaI. (1990-1991). Social defence and the victim. Some remarks on the responsibility of the victim. Bulletin of the International Society of Social Defence, 17-18, 49-55.
4.
AnttilaI.TörnuddP. (1983). Kriminologia ja kriminaalipolitiikka [Criminology and criminal justice policy]. Juva: Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing.
5.
AnttilaI.TörnuddP. (1992). The dynamics of the Finnish criminal code reform. In LahtiR.NuotioK. (Eds.), Criminal law theory in transition (pp. 11-26). Helsinki: Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing.
BarkerV. (2012). Nordic exceptionalism revisited: Explaining the paradox of a Janus-faced penal regime. Theoretical Criminology, 17, 5-25.
8.
BurkeK. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. Berkley: University of California Press.
9.
BurkeK. (1974). A grammar of motives. Berkley: University of California Press.
10.
BurmanM. (2010). The ability of criminal law to produce gender equality: Judicial discourses in the Swedish criminal legal system. Violence Against Women, 162, 173-188.
11.
CastrénE. (2004). Pahoinpitelyt ja lievät pahoinpitelyt—Miten rikoslain muutos vuonna 1995 vaikutti tunnusmerkistöjen valintaan ja tapausten etenemiseen rikosprosessissa? [Assaults and minor assaults—The effects of amending the Penal code regarding essential elements of assaults and criminal proceedings]. (Master’s thesis). University of Helsinki, Finland.
12.
CavadinoM.DignanJ. (2006). Penal systems: A comparative approach. London, England: Sage.
13.
ChristieN. (1989). The ideal victim. In FattahA. E. (Ed.), From crime policy to victim policy: Reorienting the justice system (pp. 17-30). Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
EliasR. (1993). Victims still: The political manipulation of crime victims. London, England: Sage.
16.
GarlandD. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
GillisJ. R.DiamondS. L.JebelyP.OrekhovskyV.OstovichE. M.MasIsaacK.et al. (2006). Systemic obstacles to battered women’s participation in the judicial system: When will the status quo change?Violence Against Women, 12, 1150-1168.
18.
Governmental Proposal 144/2003 to amend the Act concerning Restraining Order and to repeal the Penal Code Section 21:17.
19.
Governmental Proposal 365/1992 to amend the Penal Code Sections concerning Sexual Crimes.
20.
Governmental Proposal 41/1998 to enact the law concerning Restraining Order and certain acts related.
21.
Governmental Proposal 94/1993 to amend the Penal Code and certain other Acts: The second phase of reformation of the Penal Code.
22.
GreenD. A. (2008). When children kill children: Penal populism and political culture. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
23.
GusfieldJ. (1989). On symbols and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
24.
HeiskanenM.PiispaM. (1998). Usko, Toivo, Hakkaus. Kyselytutkimus miesten naisille tekemästä väkivallasta [Faith, hope, beating. A survey of men’s violence towards women]. Helsinki: Statistics Finland.
HonkatukiaP. (2011). Uhrit rikosprosessissa [Victims in the criminal procedure]. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
27.
HonkatukiaP.KotanenR. (in progress). Alternating positions of offender and victim within Finnish criminal justice policy.
28.
HussoM. (1997). Heikkouden hetkiä parisuhdeväkivallassa [Moments of Weakness in context of Intimate Partner Violence]. In JokinenE. (Ed.), Ruumiin siteet [The Chains of Body] (pp. 87-104). Tampere, Finland: Vastapaino.
29.
KantolaJ. (2006). Feminists theorize the state. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
30.
KivivuoriJ. (2011). Discovery of hidden crime: Self-report delinquency surveys in criminal policy context. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
31.
KotanenR. (2013). Näkymättömästä näkökulmaksi—parisuhdeväkivallan uhrit ja oikeudellisen sääntelyn muutos Suomessa [From invisible to the standpoint—The victims of intimate partnership violence and the change in legal regulation in Finland]. Helsinki, Finland: Unigrafia.
32.
LahtiM. (2001). Domesticated violence: The power of the ordinary in everyday Finland. Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki University Press.
33.
LänsinevaP. (2006). Konstitutionalismi, perusoikeudet ja yksityinen valta [Constitutionalism, fundamental rights and private authority]. Lakimies, 7-8, 1177-1190.
34.
Lappi-SeppäläT. (2007). Penal policy in Scandinavia. In TonryM. (Ed.), Crime and justice: Vol. 36. Crime, punishment, and politics in a comparative perspective (pp. 217-295). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
35.
Lappi-SeppäläT. (2012a). Penal policies in the Nordic countries 1960–2010. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 13, 85-111.
36.
Lappi-SeppäläT. (2012b). Criminology, crime, and criminal justice in Finland. European Journal of Criminology, 9, 206–223.
37.
LehtiM. (2012). Henkirikoskatsaus 2011 [Homicide review 2011]. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
38.
MathiesenT. (2012). Scandinavian exceptionalism in penal matters: Reality or wisful thinking? In UglevikT.DullumJ. (Eds.), Penal exceptionalism? Nordic prison policy and practice (pp. 13-37). London, England: Routledge.
39.
McMahonM.PenceE. (2003). Making social change reflections on individual and institutional advocacy with women arrested for domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 9, 47-74.
40.
Ministry of Social Affairs and Health Equality Bulletin. (1991). Violence towards women: The report of the violence section.
41.
Niemi-KiesiläinenJ. (2004). Rikosprosessi ja parisuhdeväkivalta [The criminal procedure and intimate partnership violence]. Helsinki, Finland: Werner Söderström Osakeyhtiö
42.
NousiainenK.PentikäinenM. (2013). Rise and fall of the CEDAW in Finland: Time to reclaim its impetus. In HellumA.AasenH. (Eds.), Women’s human rights: CEDAW in international, regional and national law (pp. 557-587). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43.
NuotioK. (2007). The rationale of the Nordic penal policy compared with the European approach. In NuotioK. (Ed.), Festschrift in honour of Raimo Lahti (pp. 157-174). Helsinki, Finland: Helsinki University Print.
44.
PalonenK. (2003). Four times of politics: Policy, polity, politicking, and politicization. Alternatives, 28, 171-186.
45.
PiispaM.HeiskanenM.KääriäinenJ.SirenR. (2006). Naisiin kohdistuva väkivalta 2005 [Violence Against Women in Finland in 2005]. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
46.
PinkerS. (2011). The better angels of our nature: A history of violence and humanity. London, England: Penguin Books.
47.
PrattJ. (2008a). Scandinavian exceptionalism in an era of penal excess. Part 1: The nature and roots of Scandinavian exceptionalism. British Journal of Criminology, 48, 119-137.
48.
PrattJ. (2008b). Scandinavian exceptionalism in an era of penal excess. Part 2: Does Scandinavian exceptionalism have a future?British Journal of Criminology, 48, 275-292.
49.
PrattJ.ErikssonA. (2013). Contrasts in punishment: An explanation of Anglophone excess and Nordic exceptionalism. London, England: Routledge.
50.
PylkkänenA. (2009). Trapped in equality: Women as legal persons in the modernisation of Finnish law. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
51.
RantalaK.SmolejM.LeppäläJ.JokinenA. (2008). Kaltevalla pinnalla: Perheen sisäisen lähestymiskiellon arviointitutkimus [On a slippery slope: An assessment of an eviction and barring order]. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
52.
Report of the Legislative Committee 11/1998 on Governmental Proposal 41/1998.
A restraining order is under consideration. The Ministry of Justice considers the law initiative yet too incomplete. (1996, June15). Helsingin Sanomat: http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/art-2000003538963.html
55.
RömkensR. (2006). Protecting prosecution: Exploring the powers of law in an intervention program for domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12, 160-186.
56.
RonkainenS. (2008). Kenen ongelma väkivalta on? Suomalainen hyvinvointivaltio ja väkivallan toimijuus [Who’s problem is violence? The Finnish welfare state and the agency of violence]. Yhteiskuntapolitiikka, 73, 388-401.
57.
SimonJ. (2009). Governing through crime: How the war on crime transformed American democracy and created a culture of fear. New York: Oxford University Press.
58.
SirénR.TuominenM. (2003). Pahoinpitelyrikokset 1995 ja 1999. Miten poliisi kontrolliviranomaisena reagoi lainmuutokseen? [Assaults in 1995 and 1999. How did the police react to amend of the penal code?]. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
59.
SmolejM. (2011). News media, crime and fear of violence. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
60.
ThamH.RönnelingA.RytterbroL.-L. (2011). The emergence of the crime victim: Sweden in a Scandinavian context. In TonryM.Lappi-SeppäläT. (Eds.), Crime and justice in Scandinavia (pp. 555-611). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
61.
TonryM. (2004). Thinking about crime: Sense and sensibility in American penal culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
62.
TörnuddP. (1993). Fifteen years of decreasing prisoner rates in Finland. Helsinki, Finland: National Research Institute of Legal Policy.
63.
van der AaS.NiemiJ.SosaL.FerreiraA.BaldryA. (2015). Mapping the legislation and assessing the impact of protection orders in the European member states. Oisterwijk, The Netherlands: Wolf Legal.
