The Finnish parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, who was criminally convicted by Finland’s Supreme Court for “hate speech” on the basis of a church pamphlet on sexuality from 2004 in which she described homosexuality as a psychosexual developmental disorder, appealed the judgment to the European Court of Human Rights during the past week.
The appeal follows Räsänen’s recent refusal of entry to the United Kingdom on the grounds of the criminal conviction, the American non-profit organisation Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which represented her in the previous proceedings and will do so again before the Strasbourg court, announced in a press release on Friday.
What ADF describes as “a landmark case for freedom of expression across Europe” thus continues a legal battle that Räsänen has fought since 2019, when she attracted the interest of the Finnish prosecution authorities after protesting against the Finnish Church’s participation in Pride, among other things by quoting a passage from the Epistle to the Romans in the Bible condemning homosexuality on Twitter.
The same year, she also took part in a radio debate on the subject, which likewise resulted in criminal charges against her. Because of both statements, she was summoned for a police interview in the autumn of 2019 that lasted many hours, during which she was asked, among other things, what she meant by words such as “sin”. In 2021, she was charged with hate speech against a minority.
When the case against Räsänen was heard in three instances in Finland in 2022, 2023 and 2026, statements in the 2004 booklet – the title of which in English would be Male and Female He Created Them: Homosexual Relationships Challenge the Christian Understanding of Humanity – were also added to the charges, and it was these that Finland’s Supreme Court ultimately convicted her for by a majority of three to two, after she had first been unequivocally acquitted in two instances.
The Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola and the Luther Foundation (Luther-säätiö) in Finland were also convicted for publishing the booklet and, together with Räsänen, were ordered to pay fines amounting to several thousand euros. The court also ruled that the disputed statements in the booklet must be “removed from public access and destroyed”.
The pamphlet has also been published on the internet, where the criminalised statements have now been censored.
Räsänen explains her appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in the following way:
“Appealing my conviction is about much more than a fine or a church pamphlet from decades ago,” Räsänen said after lodging the appeal. “My case will determine whether the fundamental rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression remain protected in Finland and throughout Europe, and whether these societies are still willing to stand up for everyone’s rights – even those with whom they disagree.
“‘Hate speech’ laws that criminalise peaceful expression are incompatible with a truly democratic society. As a Member of Parliament and a Christian who has been subjected to censorship and years of criminal investigations, I am fully aware of the devastating consequences of restricting fundamental freedoms. The European Court of Human Rights must resolutely defend these freedoms and promote the common good throughout Europe.”
Pohjola, who has also been denied entry to the United Kingdom, concurs:
Bishop Juhana Pohjola, who is appealing the case together with Räsänen and the Luther Foundation in Finland, said: “If the authorities can censor religious teaching and dictate how faith leaders are to instruct their followers, religion becomes a tool of the state rather than a means of freedom and human flourishing. The European Court of Human Rights must recognise this fact and once again affirm that freedom of religion – which is inseparable from freedom of expression – must be protected in a pluralistic and free society.”
ADF’s lawyer believes the Finnish Supreme Court judgment is extreme:
“Päivi Räsänen has been criminally convicted for peacefully expressing her Christian faith,” said Lorcán Price, legal counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Räsänen before the European Court of Human Rights. “The ban on her entering the United Kingdom is wholly disproportionate and unnecessary.
“It is clear that Europe is facing a censorship crisis, and the judgment in the case concerning a 20-year-old church booklet is one of the most extreme examples of this. The European Court of Human Rights has long held that freedom of expression protects not only harmless opinions but also those that offend, shock or disturb. No state should have the power to silence unpopular views, and widely accepted Christian beliefs should never be an exception to that rule.”
Meanwhile, the principal figure herself fears she may have to forgo yet another trip to the United Kingdom:
Commenting on the case, Räsänen said: “I have been invited to deliver the keynote address at a conference on religious freedom in Belfast in August, where I had intended to speak about the importance of freedom of expression. I find it shocking and deeply ironic that, in a democratic country such as the United Kingdom, I am being prevented from speaking at a conference on fundamental freedoms because of my conviction for ‘hate speech’.”
The Räsänen case is a decisive moment for upholding the right to freedom of expression in Finland and Europe, Alliance Defending Freedom concludes.