BREAKING: Christian parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen convicted by Supreme Court of "hate speech"

After a seven-year legal battle, the infamous “Bible tweet” prosecution of Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen concluded with a mixed verdict from the Supreme Court on Thursday. The court unanimously acquitted the former minister of the interior for her 2019 tweet quoting Scripture but convicted Räsänen for “hate speech” under the “war crimes and crimes against humanity” section of the Finnish criminal code for a 2004 booklet she co-authored for her church with Bishop Juhana Pohjola, who was also found guilty.

Räsänen has been ordered to pay a fine of €1,800; the bishop has been fined €1,100, and the foundation that published the booklet has been fined €5,000. Räsänen was previously acquitted unanimously by two lower courts on all charges.

In the 3-2 split decision, the Court stated that although the booklet did not incite hatred or violence and was “not particularly serious,” the accused were nonetheless criminally liable for having “made available to the public and kept available to the public opinions that insult homosexuals as a group on the basis of their sexual orientation.” In a stunning move of book-burning-style censorship, the Court ordered that the booklet—which was parsed line by line—be “removed from public access and destroyed.”

“I am shocked and profoundly disappointed that the court has failed to recognize my basic human right to freedom of expression,” Räsänen said in response to the verdict. “I stand by the teachings of the Christian faith and will continue to defend my and every person’s right to share their convictions in the public square. I am taking legal advice on a possible appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.”

The Court’s chaotic verdict is inconsistent and appears to be an attempt to rescue a seven-year prosecution that has been consistently rejected by both lower courts and by the police, who concluded that the booklet broke no laws. The Court ruled that the 2019 tweet was legal because Räsänen had “justified her opinion by citing a biblical text,” but convicted her for the 22-year-old booklet, authored more than a decade before gay marriage was even legalized in Finland, defending the biblical view of sexuality.

As Räsänen noted at a press conference on Thursday, the Court has drawn a “dangerous line” for freedom of speech—but nobody knows precisely where that line is. “The resources devoted to this process and the message it sends should concern anyone who values a free society,” Räsänen said. “When I began my political career over thirty years ago, I never imagined that I would one day stand before you as a defendant in a criminal case for expressing beliefs inspired by the teaching of … my faith, and yet, here we are.”

Matti Sankamo, Räsänen’s lawyer, observed that the case could have dire consequences for all published materials, as “any booklet or pamphlet or writing, within twenty years ago, could become illegal in Finland … unfortunately, the majority opinion was such that they were willing to take the risk, and it will have an impact in Finland when it comes to publishing older material.” Again, the precedent being set by the Supreme Court is unclear in both premises and implications.

Päivi Räsänen with Paul Coleman

“What stood out to me was how these vaguely worded and highly subjective hate speech laws can be interpreted and misinterpreted by anyone who looks at them,” Paul Coleman of ADF International, a member of Räsänen’s legal team, told the press conference. “Over the course of the last seven years we’ve had three judges at the district court acquit Päivi of all charges, three judges at the court of appeal acquit Päivi of all charges, and then in this case, two out of the five or three out of the six, if you include the legal advisor, also acquitted Päivi of all charges.”

In total, we have three judges out of twelve over a seven-year period who have interpreted this booklet from twenty-two years ago and have found it to be in violation of the law. It goes to show how these vague and subjective laws can be interpreted however you want, and as I’ve gone through the judgement today, the majority decision has essentially been going through this booklet and said, you can say this line, you can’t say this line, you can say this phrase, you can’t say this phrase, and that’s not how these laws were pitched to the public when they were voted on … that essentially allows judges to go through everything we’ve ever said on a line-by-line level and decide based on their opinion whether it’s allowed to be said or not.

Throughout her long and vicious prosecution, Päivi Räsänen has been an exemplar of Christian grace, and her conviction has not dented her graciousness. Despite the fact that some of her fellow parliamentarians would no doubt like to see her in jail, she said, many others sought her out to offer their condolences on the verdict, and the speaker of parliament affirmed that the conviction will not impact her parliamentary standing. Christians around the world have been following her case closely for years, and Räsänen also had a message for them.

READ THE REST OF THIS COLUMN AT THE EUROPEAN CONSERVATIVE

***

On the Bridgehead Briefing, how Canada’s euthanasia regime killed Scotland’s assisted suicide ban:

As always, follow the podcast wherever you get your content: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Rumble, or YouTube. You can get a copy of my new book How We Got Here: A Guide to Our Anti-Christian Culture at Amazon.com, Amazon.ca, or at The Bridgehead, where you can also find other culture columns if you’re interested.