History

Independent accident investigations in Finland

Independent accident investigation in Finland in a nutshell

• Investigation of aviation accidents since the early 1970s
• Planning committee for the investigation of major accidents since 1986
• Safety Investigation Authority, Finland since 1 March 1996 (Disasters and associated incidents, aviation and rail accidents).
• Investigation of maritime accidents and incidents since 1 March 1997.
• After the Safety Investigation Act (525/2011) entered into force in June 2011, accident investigation boards were no longer established. To investigate an incident, the Safety Investigation Authority now appoints an investigation team consisting of a head of team and typically 1–3 experts. Special experts may be also used as necessary. In a safety investigation, the investigator-in-charge is the Chief Safety Investigator of the investigative branch.

From the Nostaja disaster to the Disaster Investigation Planning Board – the time before Safety Investigation Authority

The sinking of the dredger Nostaja off of Pietarsaari on 6 September 1972 is considered to be the starting point for disaster investigation in Finland. Owned by the Road and Waterway Construction Bureau, Nostaja was a dredger that capsized and sank, resulting in the loss of life of 16 crewmembers. The Ministry of Commerce and Industry appointed an accident investigation board to determine the causes of the accident.

There was no comprehensive legislation on disaster investigation, and as a result of the Nostaja disaster, the Ministry of Justice appointed a working group on 13 September 1972 to create a report on how to disaster investigation should be arranged. The working group submitted its report in autumn 1974. The report suggested that the key principles of accident investigation be laid down by law. The goal of this was to increase public safety and prevent accidents. The working group suggested that accident investigation boards be placed under the Government to ensure their independence.

The Ministry of Justice then requested authorities and organisations to comment on the report. Most of the comments were positive, but the report also attracted criticism – some commenters were of the opinion that centralising the investigation of all disaster to a single organisation is not sensible. This was due to the fact that some specialities already had already established advanced investigation organisations. The Prime Minister's Office did not like the idea of having to administer investigation boards, and proposed the Ministry of the Interior as the administrative body for the boards.

The working group’s report did not result in legislative changes and the Parliament's Constitutional Law Committee took a stand in their memorandum in 1976: “The investigation of the sinking of the dredger Nostaja as well as some other disasters has revealed the insufficiency of the current regulations and guidelines. As a result, Finland must quickly come up with new legislation on disaster investigation." The Constitutional Law Committee thought that this legislation was being prepared in the Ministry of Justice, emphasised that the legislation on disaster investigation must be written quickly and required that the necessary preparatory actions be implemented without delay.

However, there were no changes to the legislation, so the Constitutional Law Committee paid attention to this fact again in its 1978 report, stating that there is not enough consistency in disaster investigation practices. According to the Committee, accident investigation is based on legislation, internal guidelines of the authorities and arrangements between different entities, but these vary from sector to sector. Over time, the investigation needs had resulted in several different investigation systems with different goals. The Board required in its report that the preparatory actions that had been pending since 1972 should be completed without delay in order to create a legislation on disaster investigation.

In spring 1979, the Ministry of Justice again appointed a working group to prepare the necessary proposals for regulations on disaster investigation. The working group's proposal was completed in 1981 and was for the most part based on the 1974 proposal. The proposal led to the creation of a Government proposal to the Parliament on the Act on Disaster Investigation and on Acts on the Amendment of the Aviation Act and section 259 of the Maritime Act in 1984 . On 3 May 1985, the Parliament approved the Act on Disaster Investigation which entered into force on 1 January 1986.

Between 1972–1985, accidents and incidents were investigated by an accident investigation board or an equivalent body separately appointed by the Government or a ministry for each case.

The Act on Disaster Investigation formed a common basis for an already established practice: since 1986, disasters were investigated by an accident investigation board appointed by the Government. The board was appointed separately for each disaster. Furthermore, from 1985 to 1995, the Ministry of Justice was home to a planning committee for disaster investigation that was appointed by the Government for three years at a time. The members of the committee members were experts in accident investigation from different fields and the task of the committee was to start preliminary investigation until the accident investigation board was appointed.

Until 1990, members of the accident investigation board were elected officials, except for the secretary. From 1990 onwards, the full-time chairperson was Master of Laws with court training Kari Lehtola, who had already been a member of the 1979 working committee that prepared proposals for regulations in the Ministry of Justice. The planning committee collected a pool of experts for investigations and arranged courses on disaster investigation for its experts.

Era of the Safety Investigation Authority

In 1990, the Parliamentary Ombudsman sent a letter to the Government on the need to transfer the investigation of aviation accidents to a party outside the Aviation Agency in order to ensure independence. The planning committee for disaster investigation had already investigated some aviation disasters that occurred after 1986. This matter led to tangible results later, as the Council Directive 94/56/EC required that the investigation of aviation accident be carried out by a permanent and independent investigation authority. This led to a 1994 Government Proposal for the Parliament on the Aviation Act and the Act on the Amendment of the Act on Disaster Investigation. The Act on the Amendment of the Act on Disaster Investigation was approved on 3 May 1995, at which time the name of the Act was changed to Act on Accident Investigation. The Act also contained provisions on the establishment of the Safety Investigation Authority, Finland. The planning committee for disaster investigation was terminated on 1 March 1996, when the Safety Investigation Authority started its operations.

On the same day, the investigation of aviation accidents was transferred from the Aviation Agency to the Safety Investigation Authority, including two Aviation Agency investigators. Pursuant to the amended legislation, also the investigation of rail accidents was transferred from the Finnish Rail Administration to the Safety Investigation Authority. The justifications for the transfer were the same as for aviation accident investigation: independence and neutrality of the investigation. At the same time, the Ministry of Transport reallocated funds to the Safety Investigation Authority for hiring two officials and for covering other costs.

The Safety Investigation Authority became an independent bureau in the Ministry of Justice. Kari Lehtola, the chairman of the now defunct planning committee for disaster investigation, was appointed as the director. In addition, the investigation of maritime accidents (except boating accidents) was transferred to the Safety Investigation Authority on 1 March 1997, for the same reasons as the investigation of aviation and rail accidents.

A significant event in the operations of the planning committee for disaster investigation and the Safety Investigation Authority in the 1990s was the investigation of the sinking of the passenger ferry Estonia (1994–1997). The sinking of Estonia was one of the largest peacetime maritime disasters in Europe in the 1990s. Upon decision by the prime ministers of three states, the investigation was carried out by a joint investigative commission chaired by a representative of Estonia, the flag state of the ship.

At that time, there were no international regulations on accident investigation, so the investigation was performed as required by the Finnish and Swedish legislation.

In 2008, an Act on the Investigation of Certain Fatal Incidents was passed. The act concerned the investigation of the school shootings of Jokela and Kauhajoki. The Government appointed accident investigation boards under the Ministry of Justice to investigate the events. Among other things, the investigation had to determine the psychosocial factors and the effect of the media and computer games on the acts.

In 2011, the Safety Investigation Act was passed, repealing the Act on Accident Investigation . The primary justifications for the necessity of the new Act included the modernisation of legislation on investigation and aligning it with the new Constitution. The changes also ensured that the national regulations match the international obligations.

As the new Act entered into force, investigation committees were no longer established. To investigate an incident, the Safety Investigation Authority now appoints an investigation team consisting of a head of team and typically 1–3 experts. Special experts may be also used as necessary. In a safety investigation, the investigator-in-charge is the Chief Safety Investigator of the investigative branch.

Furthermore, the new Act allows the investigation of an exceptional incident that is not an accident. Previously, a separate act had to be passed for such an investigation (Jokela and Kauhajoki school shootings). The decision on the initiation of an investigation on an exceptional incident will always be made by the Government. In 2019, the Safety Investigation Act was amended to specify the competence of the Safety Investigation Authority a little and to have the investigation teams of exceptional incidents operate under the Safety Investigation Authority, not the Ministry of Justice.

• PeVM 61/1978
• PeVM 4/1976
• PeVM 61/1978
• A proposal for legislation on disaster investigation, publication of the Law Drafting Department of the Ministry of Justice 1/1981
• HE 83/1984
• Act on Disaster Investigation (373/1985)
• Safety Investigation Act (525/2011)
• Act on Accident Investigation (373/1985)