The cornerstone of unity

10 NO CORRUPTION
Finland has enjoyed a leading position in the table of the world’s least corrupt countries for many years: it was at 
number one in 2007 and has been in the top 6 since. Transparency International rates countries according to a 
survey that evaluates perceptions of the degree of corruption experienced by business people. Countri
es’ 
legislation, law enforcement and judiciary systems are also analysed. 
The research method might not give a full picture of every form of corruption, but it reveals the most essential 
type of it: everyday bribery. The ratings reflect fairly well on contemporary lawmaking and enforcement, the 
functionality of governance, and the relevance of common rules to society. 
There has been no controversy about the top marks awarded to Finland and the other Nordic countries 
Finland, Iceland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. The 2016 top six least corrupted countries were Denmark, 
New Zealand, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, and Norway. 
One might wonder what our secret is, why Finland in particular has been so successful in eradicating 
corruption, and indeed this question is often asked at international gatherings by people from more distant 
cultural environments. On the other hand, in Europe our top rating seems to be somehow considered self-
evident. 
There are a number of objective, explanatory factors: transparent governance, the extensively applied 
principle of publicity, extensive municipal autonomy (innovation no. 4), a well-defined structure for the police 
force and judicial system, and a vigilant media which monitors how power is exercised and protects freedom of 
speech. 
The transparency of public decision-making is the true cornerstone of anti-corruption measures, because it 
enables the evaluation of decisions and their grounds. Part of the European Union’s funding, for instance, is 
administered through non-public channels, which evokes constant mistrust. 
The second fundamental element is the democracy of local government. Municipal power in Finland is in the 
hands of elected officials, and all minutes and decisions are entered into the public record, preventing corruption 
in e.g. decisions concerning town planning and construction contracts. 
Another factor which enhances control over how power is exercised is that Finns are among the world’s most 
eager newspaper subscribers and readers, especially when it comes to local papers. General education 
(innovation no. 41) and an exemplary library system (innovation no. 51) also promote control over the propriety 
of governance. 
Other essential factors are the prevention of financial crimes through up-to-date legislation, adequately 
resourced tax audits, competent criminal investigations and an efficient judicial system. Finland’s anti-bribery 
measures are prioritised both through education and the operations of the police, prosecutors and independent 
courts. Officials responsible for legal control, i.e. the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice, 
are quick to get involved in complaints that include suspicions of corruption. 
Following the discovery of widely covered-
up election funding in Finland’s 2007 parliamentary elections, the 
laws concerning election funding were tightened up considerably. 
Obedience to the law in Finland has historical reasons. When Finland was an autonomous Grand Duchy from 
1809
–1917, the Swedish-Finnish judicial system was defended against Russian interference and periodic 
oppression. The integrity and strong morals of judges and public authorities were fundamental to this fight for 
legitimacy, and this strict principle of legality persisted during the development of independent Finland with 
regards to governance and control. 
Johannes Koskinen 
– Minister of Justice 1999–2005, chairperson of Constitutional Law Committee 
2011
–2015, Member of the Board of Directors, EBRD 2015 -

---