Pressure in Parliament to upgrade supervision of Security Police
There have been calls in Parliament for greater Parliamentary supervision over the activities of the Finnish Security Police (SUPO). The calls have mainly come from those MPs who are currently responsible SUPO oversight.
Three committees in Parliament have supervision rights over SUPO, and the chairs of all of them are in favour of more efficiency. Two cant sweeping changes.
Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Pertti Salolainen (Nat. Coalition Party) says that as the members of three committees comprise 51 of Finland’s 200 Members of Parliament, the supervision will inevitably be superficial.
Salolainen has pondered the possibility of establishing a supervisory body for SUPO, comprising the chairs of the committees in question, in addition to three or four others, chosen by Parliament itself. In addition to its supervisory role, the group could be available for SUPO to use as a sounding board, Salolainen says.
Supervision of the Security Police should be more precise, in the view of Kimmo Sasi (Nat. Coalition Party), the chairman of the Constitutional Law Committee.
Sasi visualises a body appointed by Parliament comprising figures such as former prime ministers, foreign ministers, former presidents of the Supreme Court, a former high-ranking police official, as well as some representation from the world or research. Three of the members would have ties with the three largest political parties.
Administrative Committee chairman Tapio Tölli (Centre) is not in favour of sweeping change. “We keep relatively close contact with SUPO, and every committee has the right to ask SUPO for reports. Do we need a separate Parliamentary supervisory body? I would keep the present system.”
The Ministry of the Interior plans to investigate if SUPO had filed a frivolous criminal complaint against a man who had been deported from Sweden to Finland on suspicion of involvement in terrorism.
Salolainen feels that the case in question does not give reason to push for changes. Sasi says that before long there will be a case which “breaks the resistance of the Ministry of the Interior” toward changing supervision. Tölli feels that the fact that the case is under investigation proves that supervision works.
Three committees in Parliament have supervision rights over SUPO, and the chairs of all of them are in favour of more efficiency. Two cant sweeping changes.
Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Pertti Salolainen (Nat. Coalition Party) says that as the members of three committees comprise 51 of Finland’s 200 Members of Parliament, the supervision will inevitably be superficial.
Salolainen has pondered the possibility of establishing a supervisory body for SUPO, comprising the chairs of the committees in question, in addition to three or four others, chosen by Parliament itself. In addition to its supervisory role, the group could be available for SUPO to use as a sounding board, Salolainen says.
Supervision of the Security Police should be more precise, in the view of Kimmo Sasi (Nat. Coalition Party), the chairman of the Constitutional Law Committee.
Sasi visualises a body appointed by Parliament comprising figures such as former prime ministers, foreign ministers, former presidents of the Supreme Court, a former high-ranking police official, as well as some representation from the world or research. Three of the members would have ties with the three largest political parties.
Administrative Committee chairman Tapio Tölli (Centre) is not in favour of sweeping change. “We keep relatively close contact with SUPO, and every committee has the right to ask SUPO for reports. Do we need a separate Parliamentary supervisory body? I would keep the present system.”
The Ministry of the Interior plans to investigate if SUPO had filed a frivolous criminal complaint against a man who had been deported from Sweden to Finland on suspicion of involvement in terrorism.
Salolainen feels that the case in question does not give reason to push for changes. Sasi says that before long there will be a case which “breaks the resistance of the Ministry of the Interior” toward changing supervision. Tölli feels that the fact that the case is under investigation proves that supervision works.
Helsingin Sanomat