Pohjola and Räsänen in oral proceedings before the Supreme Court 

A large crowd of supporters gathered to demonstrate peacefully in support of Räsänen and Pohjola. Photo: Janne Koskela

On Thursday, 30 October 2025, the Supreme Court of Finland held an oral hearing in the criminal case concerning Juhana Pohjola, Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Mission Diocese of Finland, and Päivi Räsänen, MD, Member of Parliament. As had occurred in previous years, first in the Helsinki District Court and then the Helsinki Court of Appeal, the two are accused of incitement against an ethnic / minority group. According to the Prosecutor General of Finland, the booklet written by Räsänen and published by the Luther Foundation Finland, “Male and female He created them”, as well as Räsänen’s tweet concerning the participation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland [national Church] in a Pride parade, constitute hate speech against homosexuals. The lower courts unanimously dismissed the charges. According to them, the limits of freedom of speech and religion had not been exceeded. 

Before the oral proceedings began, the Freedom of Speech and Religion Association [Finland] organized a demonstration of support at Helsinki’s Market Square, near the Supreme Court. A large crowd of Räsänen and Pohjola’s supporters gathered at the foot of the well-known Havis Amanda statue.

The charges were focused on the pamphlet

Jyrki Anttinen and Juhana Pohjola calmly waiting for the oral proceedings to begin. Photo: Janne Koskela

According to the Prosecutor, the District Court and the Court of Appeal had previously ruled that the writings in question were offensive to homosexuals. But now it was up to the Supreme Court to assess whether the writings were so offensive to homosexuals that they fulfilled the criteria for criminal incitement. 

According to the Prosecutor, the pamphlet places homosexuals in an unequal position in relation to heterosexuals. The Prosecutor argued that the pamphlet is not an opinion piece, but that Räsänen wrote it as a medical expert and thus gave the false impression that homosexuality is a psychosocial developmental disorder. The Prosecutor considered this act to be intentional:

– When writing the pamphlet, Räsänen must have understood that her writing would offend homosexuals.

The pamphlet was first published in print, but was later uploaded to the internet in digital form. As for Juhana Pohjola, the Prosecutor wanted to emphasize that Pohjola had not removed the pamphlet from the website, even though a preliminary investigation had been initiated and the matter had then been dealt with in court.

According to the Prosecutor, Räsänen’s tweet has a double meaning:

– The tweet criticizes the [national] Church by criticizing homosexuals.

It was the request for an investigation that sparked criticism of the pamphlet’s content

In the middle are Päivi Räsänen, MP, and her legal counsel, Matti Sankamo, LLM Photo: ADF International

Räsänen’s legal counsel, Matti Sankamo, defended the publication of the pamphlet, stating that it was not intended to be discussed in public or nationally:

– In its educational use, it did not attract attention, criticism, or misunderstanding. Only the Prosecutor and the person who requested the initial investigation criticized it.

In his testimony, Juhana Pohjola said that when he published the pamphlet, he did not understand that it possibly could contain hate speech:

– At no point did I realize that the pamphlet could contain offensive hate speech. I understand that Christian sex education can arouse feelings of being offended, but I did not understand it in any way as defamatory.

Pohjola’s legal counsel, Jyrki Anttinen, referred to the principle of legality, the rule of law, in criminal law, according to which no one may be held guilty of a crime or sentenced to punishment on the basis of an action that was not punishable by law at the time it was committed.

– I consider that the allowance of this type of procedure is dangerous from the point of view of legal protection. I hope the Supreme Court will take a position on this, Anttinen said.

The only effective way to defend oneself

Räsänen recalled that the launch of the preliminary investigation into the pamphlet came as a big surprise to her. The case received a flurry of media attention, which is why she defended herself by posting a link to the pamphlet on her Facebook page.

– At the time, I did not receive any feedback from anyone who was offended by the content of the pamphlet, she added.

Räsänen shared the link to the pamphlet on her social media channels so that people could read what it actually said. According to Sankamo, Räsänen did the right thing:

– This was the only effective way to defend herself against the accusations of the Prosecutor General.

According to Sankamo, the pamphlet contributes to a factual social debate and cannot be considered slanderous and/or defamatory.

– In terms of the charges, the key message of the pamphlet is that all people are equal, homosexuals are created by God, and all people are sinners and equal before God, Sankamo summarized.

According to Pohjola, the case has broader implications for the teaching of Christianity:

– If the Christian view of marriage were to be declared homophobic, it would be a step toward declaring Christian teaching to be hate speech.

The process itself is already a punishment

Jyrki Anttinen (right) spoke with ADF Executive Director Paul Coleman (center) before the oral hearing began. Photo: Janne Koskela

The Pohjola and Räsänen court case has received widespread publicity abroad. The Supreme Court hearing was also attended, among others, by representatives of the ADF, an international organization defending freedom of speech. The organization’s executive director, Paul Coleman, considered the legal proceedings to be of great international significance:

– This is an exceptionally important case because online expression today, and in many ways the Bible itself, is the subject of legal proceedings. It seems that at every stage of the legal process, Päivi and Juhana’s faith is not separable from the text of the Bible, and therefore, if the process leads to a conviction, it will in a sense mean the criminalization of all Christian teaching. This is important not only in Finland, but around the world.

ADF held an international press conference via remote connection that same afternoon. In it, Coleman stated that the years-long legal process is a punishment in itself. Coleman also reflected on the broader consequences of the legal process:

– If the prosecutor succeeds in overturning previous acquittals, not only would Päivi’s tweet from 2019 or the pamphlet published in 2004 be considered criminal, but ultimately countless other materials in Finland could also be considered criminal, which could also have international implications.

At the press conference, Juhana Pohjola said he was pleased with the widespread international attention the legal process has received around the world. He also hoped that the events would encourage Christians throughout the world to boldly profess their faith:

– Today in court, I said that I am a Christian, and that is why I acted as I did. I encourage you to do the same.

English translation: Thomas Toepfer