VICTIMS’ EXPERIENCES OF HATE CRIMES IN FINLAND 2014–2018 1 VICTIMS’ EXPERIENCES OF HATE CRIMES IN FINLAND 2014–2018 Contents 1 Introduction . 4 1.1 Definition of a hate crime ....................................................................................................4 1.2 Aims of the report .............................................................................................................4 1.3 Collection of data ...............................................................................................................5 1.4 Data ................................................................................................................................6 2 The reported hate crimes . 7 2.1 The respondent .................................................................................................................7 2.2 The victim’s information .....................................................................................................7 2.3 The perpetrator ................................................................................................................8 2.4 Location and date of the incident ........................................................................................8 2.5 Type of crime ..................................................................................................................10 2.6 Motive ............................................................................................................................11 3 After the hate crime . 13 3.1 Filing a report to the police and handling of the case by the police .......................................... 13 3.1.1 Incidents reported to the police .............................................................................. 13 3.1.2 Why the incident was not reported to the police .......................................................14 3.2 Impact of the hate crime on the victim ................................................................................16 3.2.1 Emotional reactions and impacts on health ..............................................................16 3.2.2 Sense of insecurity changes everyday life ................................................................18 3.2.4 Indifference and fighting spirit ...............................................................................19 3.3 The help received and required by the victim .......................................................................20 3.3.1 Help from and attitudes of eyewitnesses ..................................................................20 3.3.2 ‘Conversation and tea’ .......................................................................................... 21 3.3.3 Concrete support and development of services ....................................................... 21 3.3.4 Information and social influencing ..........................................................................23 Summary . 24 Literature. .26 Appendix 1 ....................................................................................................................................27 Appendix 2 ....................................................................................................................................29 Raportin toteuttajat: This publication received funding from the EU’s Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme (2014–2020). The author is fully responsible for the content of the publication, which does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission. 2 Acknowledgements This report was written as part of the EU-funded project ‘Against Hate’, managed by the Ministry of Justice. It was created in close cooperation with experts from Victim Support Finland and the Ministry of Justice. Project Manager Milla Aaltonen from the Ministry of Justice and Executive Director of Victim Support Finland Leena-Kaisa Åberg in particular provided valuable insight for the report and its implementation. Data collection for this report would not have been possible without the assistance of the NGOs and other parties that spread information about the collection of data. Seta – LGBTI Rights in Finland kindly provided us with forms that they had prepared as the basis for our form. Inclusion Finland (KVTL) assisted us in clarifying the language used in the form and brochure. The experts who participated in the press conference and the hate crime networks of Victim Support Finland in both Helsinki and Tampere brought up important considerations during the planning of the reporting. Researcher Jenita Rauta from the Police University College kindly shed light on the sub- ject for us from the perspective of police reporting. From the National Forum for Cooperation of Religions in Finland (CORE Forum), Pia Jardi and Miina Noroila in particular were of great assistance in the implementation of this report. The biggest thanks go to all the victims of hate crimes, the people close to the victims and the witnesses of hate crimes who made this report possible by answering the survey and those who expanded on their answers by agreeing to an interview. I hope that the perspective of the victims that is highlighted in this report will be taken into account and that reporting that is based on victims’ experiences will be continued in the future. Inka Nokso-Koivisto, CORE Forum 3 VICTIMS’ EXPERIENCES OF HATE CRIMES IN FINLAND 2014–2018 1 Introduction differs from reports of the Police University College in 1 1. Definition of a hate crime that it examines hate crimes motivated by language as a separate category. In this report, the motives are The Criminal Code of Finland does not include a sep- divided into seven categories: 1) sexual orientation, 2) arate definition for a hate crime, but a motive of hate gender identity or gender expression, 3) skin colour can be grounds for increasing the punishment accord- or ethnic or national origin, 4) language, 5) religion or ing to the code. According to the Criminal Code of Fin- conviction, 6) disability and 7) other. land (Chapter 6, section 5, paragraph 4), the grounds for increasing the punishment include ‘commission of All information collected for this report is based on re- the offence for a motive based on race, skin colour, ports submitted or interviews given by victims, friends birth status, national or ethnic origin, religion or belief, and relatives of victims, and eyewitnesses. Only a small sexual orientation or disability or another correspond- part of the cases discussed here have been reported to ing grounds’.1 the police, and only a few of them have gone to court. In this sense, we are not talking about actions that have This study uses the definition recommended by the been deemed as crimes by a court of justice. The term Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights hate crime is therefore used in this report according (ODIHR) of the Organization for Security and Co-op- to the definition given by the victim. We also do not eration in Europe (OSCE), which defines hate crimes examine whether the events actually unfolded as re- as criminal acts motivated by bias or prejudice towards ported. particular groups of people. A hate crime therefore includes two elements: 1) the act constitutes an offence under criminal law and 2) the perpetrator has con- 1 .2 Aims of the report sciously chosen the victim or target because of a pro- tected characteristic associated with the individual in This report is the first report on hate crimes in Finland question. This protected characteristic can be related that broadly examines the experiences of different to the individual’s ethnic, religious or national group, groups and is based on the experiences of the victims. race, sexual minority or something similar.2 In other In Finland, reports of hate crimes by victims have been words, one possible motivation for a hate crime is the gathered and partly also reported by a few NGOs or victim’s presumed or actual affiliation or other special religious communities, such as Seta and the Jewish relationship with a certain group and the hate or bias Community of Helsinki. However, they have only gath- felt by the perpetrator towards this group. ered information with regard to one or a few minority groups. The experiences of victims of hate speech and The same definition is used in the reports on hate harassment have previously been examined in reports crime by the Police University College.3 This report such as the Survey on hate speech and harassment and their influence on different minority groups, which was 1 https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039.pdf. conducted by Owal Group for the first time in 2015 and 2 OSCE 2014: 12. again in 2017. Owal Group’s survey includes all minority 3 Rauta 2018: 9. groups. 4 One aim of this report is to supplement existing infor- the reporting, and information about it was spread mation on hate crimes in Finland. The annual report via both social media and traditional media, on NGOs’ prepared by the Police University College is based on websites and by distributing paper brochures in con- reports filed with the police. The 2017 report exam- nection with various events.5 Additionally, brochures ined a total of 1,165 reports. However, according to on the collection of data were delivered to reception estimates, as much as 80 per cent of all hate speech, centres and religious communities. harassment and other similar incidents go unreported to the police.4 In this report, we also want to reach The data was primarily collected with an online