Finland Times

 

Witness protection could be improved, if information can be provided anonymously.

 

The government proposes that anonymous evidence should also be possible in the country. It is already used in many other European countries such as Norway, Denmark and Estonia.

 

Jaakko Rautio from the Ministry of Justice points out that the change is fundamentally important, although anonymous evidence is seldom utilised. He says such evidence could be used in a few cases a year.

 

The identity of the witness might be concealed when the maximum penalty for the crime is at least eight years imprisonment.

 

The evidence would be used in cases such as homicides, aggravated drug offences and human trafficking.

 

The condition for anonymity would be justified if the concealment of identity is necessary, because there is a serious threat to the life and wellbeing of the witness or the evidence might pose threat to those close to the witness.

 

Exceptional arrangement would be arranged only if the witness could not be sufficiently protected.

 

Disclosure of a witness identity can be required in a case where one witnesses a member of a criminal gang committing a crime. Also, the identity of a witness may be exposed in a situation when an undercover agent is given the right to shed light on the activities of a criminal group.

 

Instead, the question of anonymity should not arise when the contents of the evidence expose the witness.

 

Rautio explains that in a case where no other person other than the accomplice is aware of an incident anonymity should not be given.