Parliamentary Ombudsman Jari Råman finds that Helsinki Police Department acted in violation of the Criminal Investigation Act when the police failed to register the death threats reported by the complainant. The Ombudsman also criticises the fact that the police did not recognise possible domestic violence in the situation.

The complainant had gone to the Pasila police station after having received messages containing death threats from his brother, who lived abroad. According to the complainant, the police had stated that a report of an offence did not need to be filed and that the police could not intervene in the matter because the person threatening the complainant lived abroad. According to the police, the complainant had not indicated they wanted to report an offence. On the following day, the complainant reported an offence on the same matter at Eastern Uusimaa Police Department.

The Ombudsman emphasises that the police have a fairly absolute obligation to register a report of an offence or an event that the person reporting it suspects to be an offence. The report cannot be refused on the grounds that the matter appears to be unclear or difficult to investigate. Registering a report of an offence and assessing the preconditions for initiating a pre-trial investigation are two separate measures.

The police must recognise domestic violence

According to the Ombudsman, the possibility of repeated domestic violence must be taken into account in the assessment of the actions. The threat was made by the complainant’s brother, but the police did not seem to have recognised the link with domestic violence.

Police officers have a particular obligation to identify situations involving domestic violence, as the victim may not necessarily realise themselves that they are a victim of domestic violence. The complainant’s and the officer’s accounts differed in terms of the advice given, but according to the Ombudsman, referring the victim to support services did not seem to have been fully in accordance with the law and the guidelines issued at the police services.

Shortcomings also in the handling of the administrative complaint

The Ombudsman also criticises the way Helsinki Police Department handled the administrative complaint filed on the matter. The decision on the complaint had not been justified in the manner required under the Administrative Procedure Act, as it did not indicate the applied provisions or take a stand on the appropriateness of the police officer’s conduct, among other things.

The complainant had also felt that the police treated them in a discriminatory manner because of their gender identity. However, according to the Ombudsman, the available report did not reveal discrimination or inappropriate behaviour that would have given rise to oversight of legality measures. The Ombudsman still emphasises the need to encounter vulnerable persons sensitively so that sensitive offences can also be reported in a safe and accepting atmosphere.

The Ombudsman drew attention to the obligation to register a report of an offence, the identification of domestic violence, the referral of victims to services providing help, and appropriate justifications for a decision issued on an administrative complaint. The Ombudsman also brought his views to the attention of Helsinki Police Department.

Because of the sensitive nature of the matter, the decision will not be published in its entirety on the Ombudsman’s website.

Further information is available from Senior Legal Adviser Anu Lempiäinen, tel. +358 9 432 3369.