FINNISH PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATION ACT

Esitutkintalaki — Chapter 3, Section 9

Esitutkintalaki (805/2011) · Current consolidated text

Suomenkielinen säädösteksti

Jollei tärkeä yleinen tai yksityinen etu muuta vaadi, esitutkinta saadaan jättää toimittamatta tai jo aloitettu esitutkinta lopettaa sellaisen rikoksen johdosta, josta ei ole odotettavissa ankarampaa rangaistusta kuin sakkoa ja jota on kokonaisuutena arvostellen pidettävä ilmeisen vähäisenä. (17.4.2026/269)

Jos viranomainen sen perusteella, mitä muussa laissa säädetään, jättää ryhtymättä toimenpiteisiin rikoksesta epäillyn saattamiseksi syytteeseen, esitutkinta toimitetaan kuitenkin vain erityisestä syystä.

Tässä pykälässä tarkoitetut päätökset tekee tarvittaessa tutkinnanjohtaja.

English translation (unofficial)

Unless an important public or private interest requires otherwise, a pre-trial investigation may be omitted or an investigation already begun may be discontinued in respect of an offence for which no more severe punishment than a fine is expected and which, considered as a whole, is clearly minor.

If, under another Act, an authority decides not to take measures to bring the suspected offender to prosecution, a pre-trial investigation is nevertheless conducted only for a special reason.

Where necessary, the investigation leader makes the decisions referred to in this section.

Note:
This English translation is unofficial. The Finnish statutory text is authoritative.

Legal context

This section permits, but does not automatically require, omission or discontinuation of an investigation only within the statutory conditions. The first subsection requires both that no punishment more severe than a fine is expected and that the offence is clearly minor when assessed as a whole. An important public or private interest may require the investigation to proceed despite those conditions.

The current text was amended on 17 April 2026 (269/2026). It should be read together with section 10 on limiting an investigation, section 10a on limitation based on a confession, and Chapter 11, section 1 on written decisions. These are different legal mechanisms and should not be treated as interchangeable.

Questions for checking the procedural record

01
Was the investigation omitted or discontinued under section 9, or was a different statutory mechanism used?
02
Does the alleged offence meet both statutory criteria: no expected punishment more severe than a fine and clear minor character assessed as a whole?
03
Was an important public or private interest considered?
04
Who made the decision, and is a written decision required under Chapter 11, section 1?
05
Does the decision identify the statutory basis and provide reasons appropriate to the nature and scope of the matter?

Official source and amendment

Finnish wording checked against the current consolidated text available on Finlex on 12 October 2026.