Suek, the Finnish sports ethics center, is investigating cases of harassment in which the suspect is Joni Rytkönen, who plays in the men’s Superpesis. We found out the difference between Suek’s investigation and the police’s investigation.
Ville Kinnunen,
Sanna Kähkönen
On Tuesday, it was reported that Joensuu is playing in Maila Joni from Rytkö harassment is suspected. has not reached Rytkö to comment on the suspicions.
The first to report on Superpesis harassment cases Ilta-Sanomat reported on Tuesday (you will switch to another service)that the persons who reported the harassment consider taking the matter to the police.
The fact that the matter is under investigation by Suek (Finnish Sports Ethics Center) and not by the police does not in itself weaken the legal protection of the parties, says the Doctor of Law Eelis Paukku.
Paukku is a member of the disciplinary committee for ethical issues of the Olympic Committee, so he does not comment on Joni Rytkönen’s case, but presents his assessment on a general level.
According to Paukku, the legal protection of the suspect, i.e. for example the right to legal aid, does not apply in the disciplinary procedure.
– On the other hand, with the current rules, Suek cannot force the parties to cooperate or contribute to the investigation, in which case the need for legal protection is naturally less, says Paukku.
The subject of the decision also has the right to appeal the decision to the Sports Legal Protection Board. Therefore, Paukku considers the risk that an investigation by the sport’s own body would endanger the status of the subject of the investigation in a possible criminal process later.
What effect can it have if the person who experienced harassment possibly postpones reporting to the police because they think that the matter is already under investigation?
According to Paukku, in general, it would always be best that when a possible crime is suspected, the investigation starts immediately. The screen gets old when people’s memories deteriorate, and old stuff is much harder to figure out.
Suek has several sources of information
The Finnish Sports Ethics Center says that it uses a wide range of different sources of information when investigating cases. A significant part of the investigation is interviews, written material and visual materials.
Suek’s communications manager Susanna Sokka answers ‘s questions by email and specifies that he is answering in general and not regarding Rytkönen’s case.
According to Eelis Paukku, Suek needs to find out exactly who is involved in what matter and who is heard and who is not.
In Suek, two people who had extensive police experience before moving to Suek are responsible for the qualifications. If the investigation reveals things that point to a crime, Suek will file a criminal report if necessary.
A possible investigation by the police will proceed in accordance with the law, and the investigation will follow the process of serious ethical violations in sports, says Suek.
The police have investigative methods in accordance with the Coercive Measures and Preliminary Investigation Act, which Suek does not have.
Rytkönen was removed from Superpesis’ seasonal advertisements
As soon as the suspicions of harassment came to light, the measures concerning Joni Rytkö also began.
Joensuu Maila removed Rytkönen from the playing lineup of their Superpesis team. Nelonen Media removed its service on Tuesday An episode of the Hutunkeitäjät podcast (you will switch to another service)where Rytkö was interviewed.
On Wednesday, the Baseball Federation told STT that Rytkönen will be removed from Superpesis seasonal ads (you will switch to another service).
Rytkönen can be characterized as having been cancelled, i.e. canceled or annulled. Paukku says that this happens very often these days.
Mere doubt and the subsequent cancellation can cause great personal harm. However, according to Pauku, whether this should happen and whether it is right is a topic of separate discussion.
He estimates that previous examples have lowered the threshold for telling about grievances, when those who have experienced grievances have noticed that there are concrete consequences for telling them.
– Sometimes the attention even increases the victims’ chance of getting justice. Of course, strong reactions also certainly increase unnecessary reports and threats with them, but it is a mild phenomenon that always comes with when the reporting threshold lowers, says Paukku.
Suek tells by e-mail that the emergence of cases, information and training have increased athletes’ awareness of what the Finnish Sports Ethics Center does.
Eelis Paukku is not as sure as Suek that athletes would understand, for example, the difference between Suek’s investigation and a police investigation.
– According to my own experience, sports players and the field of organizations understand the difference in some way, but the athletes themselves do not much.