Translation

SPEECH BY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC MARTTI AHTISAARI AT A
CEREMONY MARKING THE 80^TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SUPREME
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT ON 2.9.1998

Justice is an essential matter in society. We need justice and security both in our mutual relations and in our dealings with the public authorities. Rather than being merely an expression of public power, genuine justice must correspond to people’s perceptions of what is right and fair.

This ceremony honouring the 80^th anniversary of the Supreme Administrative Court gives me an excellent opportunity to continue the series of speeches in which I advocate developing the rights and legal safety of the individual. The position of the individual in relation to publicity and public power must constantly be the subject of critical assessment. Especially in this court, where the principle of free right of appeal continues to enjoy respect, it is natural to seek the perspective of people when thousands of individual appeals are decided each year. Every appellant has a well-founded need to seek justice in his or her case.

The point of view of the individual is also needed in the ongoing constitutional discourse. Questions relating to the separation of powers are often in the foreground. The relationship between private persons and public power often receives less attention. However, it is precisely from this perspective that the development of our country as one in which the rule of law obtains must be evaluated.

A fact that introduces a historical challenge into discussion of the rule of law is that K.J. Ståhlberg, the first President of the Republic and the author of our Constitution, was also a President of this court and the person who got its work under way. That the proposed revision of the Constitution is now being deliberated by Parliament likewise adds topicality to the subject.

The principles of democracy and rule of law have now been explicitly enshrined in the new draft Constitution. That means that all exercise of power must be based on collectively established norms and derive its justification from people’s approval. Thus the principles of justice and democracy go hand-in-hand.

According to the new Constitution - if, as I believe it will be, it is adopted in the form proposed - democracy includes the right of individuals to participate in and influence the development of society and the environment in which they live. That provision accentuates and broadens the significance of social participation in comparison with the situation now. In a democratic society, the individual’s opportunities to exercise influence can not be confined merely to being able to vote in elections. Opportunities to influence matters must be real and meaningful, because they are the only kind that will inspire interest and a will to participate.

The principle of the rule of law requires that the exercise of public power always takes place on a foundation of law. In all public actions, the law must be scrupulously observed, as it nowadays is. From a constitutional perspective, conformity to law emphasises the legislator’s position as the instance that bestows rights and imposes obligations; in other words, it underlines a commitment to shared laws. From the perspective of the individual, this does not suffice as a standard of justice. Law is always only a means and it is justice that is the end. Thus the aim in all actions must be justice founded on laws.

In addition to that, an entitlement to have the legality of official decisions with a bearing on one’s own rights and obligations subjected to the scrutiny of an independent court is a further inseparable aspect of the rule of law. It is precisely in this that the foundation on which our administrative courts stand is to be found. The independence of courts is a principle that must be uncompromisingly adhered to, even though it is not always an unproblematic matter.

From the perspective of the Constitution, the judicial system is a fundamental segment in the tripartition of governmental powers. Judicial power is exercised by independent courts, which in the highest instance are the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court. Reinforcing the position and structure of the judicial system in the Constitution is an important part of strengthening national sovereignty.

In many cases nowadays it is difficult for people to obtain a comprehensive picture of how public or other real power is exercised. Decisions and arrangements that apply to one’s own living habitat remain cloaked in obscurity - as do their architects and the grounds on which they are arrived at. Indeed, I have often noted that public power has become complicated in both structure and operation. It includes the State, municipalities, church administrative authorities and many other organisations that perform public tasks. Growing internationalisation of matters and the multi-level character of problems have contributed to increasing alienation from the system and lowering the level of participation. The fate of one’s job can be determined in a boardroom somewhere far away.

Nevertheless people have a right to be able to feel that official power is there for everyone and for the good of society. That poses a challenge that must be met in developing the contents of the rule of law, but in particular it challenges legislators and public administration in general to make the system more understandable and manageable. The State must support its citizens and strive to promote their wellbeing as tangibly as possible.

In assessing the exercise of power, more attention should be paid to clarity and dependability of actions. For the sake of equality it is also essential to ensure that obtaining justice or administrative services does not depend on how well someone is able to look after his or her affairs. Equality of national language is likewise associated with this; all must have a real right to transact their business in their mother tongue, either Finnish or Swedish. Nor must gaps between levels of knowledge nor difference of wealth lead to a de facto legal inequality.

The courts are in a key position when the question is asked: What is the status of the rule of law in this country of ours? It is in the courts that we see how legislation functions in practice. However, the work of a court can not stop at pronouncing and applying laws; instead, its goal must be to dispense justice. This goal is appositely described in an old set of guidelines for judges:

What is not right and fair must not be law, either.

It would be important from people’s point of view to ensure that the threshold to justice does not become too high and that the procedure leading to it remains clearly understandable for the parties involved.

How courts explain their decisions is of central importance. Only on the basis of adequate explanations can the correctness of judgements and rulings be assessed. The possibility of assessment of this kind is an essential part of democracy and also strengthens the credibility of the judicial system.

Major reforms have been carried through in the judicial system in recent years and procedures have been developed. Implementation of most of the reforms has gone well, but problems have also been in evidence: resources do not always correspond to altered tasks, ways of dealing with matters have become more complicated, and legal costs have risen in many courts, especially when cases are contested. It would be essential for the overall development of our constitutional state not to lose the popular character of our traditional court procedures and to be able to preserve faith in the reality of court proceedings and legal safeguards.

The revised provisions on fundamental rights in force since 1995 have strengthened opportunities to examine official actions more from the point of view of the individual. It is particularly important that the principles underpinning fair legal proceedings and good administration have been reinforced in the Constitution. I hope that these principles will be reflected in practice when reforms are carried through in the justice sector and that they will highlight the responsibility to deliberate matters from the points of view of the parties involved.

In an internationalising world and with respect to cultural and economic relations, justice has become a substantial field of cooperation. I have been following with great interest the Supreme Administrative Court’s international contacts with countries both far away and in our immediate region. Cooperation in the field of justice is an important instrument both for promoting human rights and in efforts to strengthen the Northern Dimension of the European Union. An effectively functioning justice system is a truly important national success factor and one of the strengths of Finnish society.

The foundation of the Supreme Administrative Court in the beginning of our existence as an independent state was an important step along the road of life as a society governed by law. It is striking that, despite the expansion that administration has undergone, the principle of a general right to appeal has been preserved undiminished down through the decades and in the reforms carried through in recent years. Also in this court, it has been possible to preserve a citizen-centred view of the administration of justice.

Constant change in society and the judicial system is particularly reflected in public administration. Taxation, social security and environmental matters affect everyone. In other respects, too, everyone continually has dealings with the authorities. The principles underpinning the rule of law must continue to be respected despite all changes. Legal safety with respect to the exercise of public power is of essential importance in the development of a system founded on the rule of law.

Administrative courts are the focus of great expectations today. Therefore it is important that, in addition to this institution, also regional administrative courts can be strengthened. This, too, is part of the work being done to strengthen the rule of law as the revised Constitution takes shape.

Confidence in justice is founded on open and certain resolution of matters, adequate presentation of the grounds for decisions as well as on development of one’s own actions. Smugness can never be afforded. A state founded on the rule of law must be constantly and actively defended. Courts bear a special responsibility in this respect.

I wish the Supreme Administrative Court, its members and all of its staff continuing success in their important work to enhance people’s legal safety and strengthen the rule of law.