Jesuit Morality in Crime Reporting on Immigrants

Attitudes toward the problems of humanitarian immigration in the UK took a strange turn after Keir Starmer came to power. He began arresting people participating in protests and those complaining about abuses, and even started releasing criminals from prisons to make room for these political prisoners.

Since then, Starmer has changed direction and ordered investigations into the most serious crimes. From here in Finland, I can't say how seriously those investigations have been pursued.

* * *

In Finland, too, efforts were made to conceal the problems of immigration for a long time, but gradually this became difficult as the general sense of security—or lack thereof—became increasingly widespread. At some point, Finnish media decided that the names of criminals would be published if their sentences were at least two years long.

However, the fact remains that hardly anyone is interested in the names of those convicted. Rather, what is important—especially in terms of people's views on immigration policy—is that the ethnic background of those who commit crimes should be reported in all, or at least in more than minor, offenses.

* * *

Today’s crime news concerned a man about ten years older who had provided intoxicants and sexually exploited a girl who was originally 12 years old over a two-year period. Nothing is said about the man's ethnic background; instead, it’s stated that “the name of the convicted is withheld to protect the victim.”

This practice has become more common in most media in recent years. As a result, essential information about the perpetrators of sexual crimes—particularly those against teenagers—is increasingly being withheld. This is the case even though people aren’t interested in the offender’s name, as I stated earlier, but in whether the person belongs to the native or immigrant population.

This sharply contradicts the guidelines used by the Finnish press, which remind journalists that—quote—“journalism that strives for truth helps the public form a picture of society and the world.” Instead, it seems to follow the centuries-old Jesuit morality, in which "the end justifies the means."

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
EU Commission Should Take Migration and Related Crime Seriously
The Increasing Criminality Among Swedish Students Stems from Their Values
Is the UK's Democracy Facing an Existential Crisis?

Non-Discrimination Ombudsman Attempted to Prohibit the Use of Statistics in Quota Refugee Selection

Finland's Non-Discrimination Ombudsman issued a statement on Thursday, stating that discriminatory guidelines were given in the preparation of the refugee quota led by Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party). According to the Ombudsman, the political leadership has sought to favor Christian refugees at the expense of those coming from Muslim-majority countries.

Additionally, the Ombudsman’s statement mentioned the objectives of the Finns Party and used the words "open Islamophobia." She argued that the actions of the minister and her special advisor appear consistent with those objectives.

* * *

Official guidelines for Finnish civil servants explicitly state that "since a civil servant exercises public authority in their work, they must strictly follow the law and act impartially, independently, and fairly." Furthermore, they state—again verbatim—that "a civil servant must not abuse their power."

Thus, Minister of Finance and Finns Party leader Riikka Purra did not simply shrug off the statement from the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman, which is a state authority. Instead, she acknowledged that the statement was a serious matter, as "discrimination is a criminal offense." As a result, the Minister of the Interior and her ministry will examine the statement, and the Chancellor of Justice is also expected to provide an opinion on the matter.

However, according to Purra, the decision-making process regarding the refugee quota was conducted normally. She also found it "procedurally quite unusual that the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman is reading political party programs and drawing conclusions for its official processes based on them."

Additionally, she pointed out that "just a few days ago, the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman also commented more broadly on the effects of the government's immigration policy changes, so this is not the first time."

* * *

Many other Finns Party members also weighed in on the matter. Jani Mäkelä, the leader of the party’s parliamentary group, stated that "particularly the term Islamophobia and the fact that the Ombudsman openly attacks the Finns Party as a party in the statement and analyzes our policies—this, in my opinion, is not part of the Ombudsman’s duties at all."

Party secretary Harri Vuorenpää, in turn, remarked that it is "shocking that an authority whose role is specifically to ensure equality is attacking a single political party in such an openly hostile and generalized manner. We find this to be highly inappropriate and something that only deepens divisions in society."

He also questioned why those who speak about issues related to Islam are now being labeled as Islamophobes. He continued by saying that "such methods of silencing opinions are common on social media, but surely an authority responsible for equality should restrain itself... One has to wonder why the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman interprets the Finns Party’s policies so negatively. Is the Ombudsman suffering from Finns Party-phobia?"

* * *

The political left and the Greens naturally held a completely opposite view and demanded a statement from Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (National Coalition Party). It remains to be seen what will follow—if anything at all. However, at this stage, the only certainty is that the final decision on the legality of the government's refugee quota policies will be made by the Chancellor of Justice.

As for my own stance, I firmly support selecting quota refugees in a way that ensures those coming to Finland have the best possible conditions for integrating into Western society. Accordingly, I support the government’s policy of considering Christianity as a positive criterion when selecting refugees to be admitted to Finland. 

However, my reasoning is not based—illegally—on religion itself but rather on observed differences over the years in crime statistics and employment rates between different immigrant groups in Finnish society. Ignoring these differences would simply be stupid.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Finnish, Japanese, and Dutch Adults Lead in Literacy, Numeracy, and Problem-Solving Skills
Important Changes Ahead: What You Need to Know About Finland’s Quota Refugee Selection
The Non-Discrimination Ombudsman violates the law on openness