In a divided ruling, the Finnish Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a mixed decision in the long-running case involving parliamentarian Päivi Räsänen, finding her guilty on one charge of hate speech while unanimously acquitting her on another.
The court voted 3–2 to convict and fine Räsänen for her role in publishing and maintaining public access to a 23-page pamphlet published in 2004 arguing that “homosexual relationships challenge the Christian concept of humanity.” The narrow majority said the material—distributed by the Luther Foundation Finland, the legal entity behind Evangelical Lutheran Mission Diocese of Finland (ELMDF)—“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.”
The ruling also applied to bishop Juhana Pohjola, who published the pamphlet. Pohjola is the leader of the 2,749-member ELMDF, as well as chairman of the International Lutheran Council, a worldwide association of conservative Lutheran churches that oppose same-sex marriages and the ordination of women.
At the same time, the court unanimously upheld Räsänen’s acquittal on a charge stemming from a 2019 social media post in which she posted a picture of Romans 1:24–27 to criticize the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland—one of Finland’s two national churches—for its affiliation with the Helsinki Pride march. Though the national church does not officially perform same-sex marriages, it has grown increasingly LGBTQ affirming. Räsänen led the opposition against the passage of Finland’s law recognizing same-sex marriage in 2017.
The ruling by the Supreme Court, which heard the case in October, upheld earlier lower-court decisions that the tweet, while offensive, did not amount to “incitement to hatred” and thus did not meet the legal threshold for criminal liability.
The mixed verdict marks the latest development in a case that has drawn international attention for its implications regarding freedom of expression, the limits of religious speech, and the interpretation of hate-speech laws in democratic societies. In February, US House Republicans invited Räsänen to testify at a hearing on European online censorship laws.
Räsänen, longtime member of Finland’s Parliament for the Christian Democrats and former interior minister, expressed strong disagreement with the conviction.
“I am shocked and profoundly disappointed that the court has failed to recognize my basic human right to freedom of expression,” she said following the ruling. “I stand by the teachings of my Christian faith, and will continue to defend my and every person’s right to share their convictions in the public square.”
Räsänen said she is considering appealing the decision to the European Court of Human Rights.
ADF International, the global arm of the Alliance Defending Freedom, represented Räsänen and Pohjola and has been involved throughout the proceedings. In a statement released after the decision, the organization highlighted the dual nature of the outcome.
“Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy,” said Paul Coleman, the organization’s executive director. “It is right that the Court has acquitted Päivi Räsänen for her 2019 Bible verse tweet. However, the conviction for a simple church pamphlet published decades ago—before the law under which she has been convicted was even passed—is an outrageous example of state censorship.”
This would have a “chilling effect” on society in regard to free speech, he said.
The legal proceedings against Räsänen began in 2021 after Finnish prosecutors brought multiple charges alleging that her public statements and writings violated laws prohibiting “incitement against a minority group,” including sexual minorities. The charges related to three separate instances, including the 2004 pamphlet, the 2019 tweet, and comments made during a radio interview. Lower courts had previously acquitted Räsänen on all counts, finding that her statements fell within the bounds of protected expression and did not constitute a hate crime.
The Supreme Court’s ruling partially overturns those earlier acquittals, but only with respect to the pamphlet. In its decision, the court noted Räsänen’s text characterized homosexuality as a “disorder of psychosexual development” and a “sexual abnormality,” concluding that such descriptions were demeaning toward gay and lesbian people.
The court has not yet released a full English-language summary, but Finnish-language reporting indicates that the justices were divided on how to balance protections for free expression with safeguards against speech deemed harmful to minority groups.
At the same time, the unanimous acquittal on the tweet signals a point of judicial agreement that in public debate not all religiously grounded expression—particularly the quotation of religious texts—meets the threshold for criminal sanction. The distinction suggests the court is attempting to navigate a line, however contested, between protected participation in civic discourse and speech it determines to be injurious.
If Räsänen proceeds with an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, the case could extend well beyond Finland. The court, which is based in Strasbourg, France, would likely be asked to consider whether the application of Finland’s hate-speech laws in this instance aligns with the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly its protections for freedom of expression and religion and how that aligns with upholding the dignity of minority communities.
“This is not about my free speech alone, but that of every person in Finland,” Räsänen said. “A positive ruling would help to prevent other innocent people from experiencing the same ordeal for simply sharing their beliefs.”
