When authorities fail,
citizens pay the bill.
This is the calculation of what defending the rule of law costs a private individual.
The Cost Doesn’t Disappear
When an authority fails its duty, the work doesn’t go undone. It transfers to the citizen’s responsibility.
Investigation, documentation, complaints, appeals, litigation – all of this could have been avoided if building control had acted according to law.
Authority error has a cost. The question is only who pays.
3,400 Hours
We have spent over 3,400 hours investigating the matter.
Where the Time Went
- Obtaining documents – information requests, archive reviews, compiling documentation
- Reconstructing the chain of events – what happened, when, and by whose action
- Assessing legality – how authorities should have acted vs. how they did act
- Expert opinions – obtaining and analyzing technical evidence
- Complaints and clarifications – to 12 authorities, multiple supplements to each
- Litigation documents – summons applications, written pleadings, evidence
This has not been voluntary. It has been necessary to realize legal protection in a situation where authorities did not perform their own duties.
Litigation Costs
The costs of just the first trial’s District Court proceedings have risen to approximately €190,000.
A lawyer was involved in the trial to ensure formal matters and bring credibility. The content was produced ourselves.
Why This Amount
- Lawyers would not have done this work – no one takes on a case requiring years of study and thousands of hours of documentation
- The costs would have been impossible – if all work had been done at lawyer hourly rates, the bill would have exceeded €500,000
- Authorities’ investigative work transferred to us – we did what authorities should have done ex officio
Defending the rule of law is not possible without exceptional resources – or exceptional commitment.
Not Error – Deliberate Law Violation
During District Court proceedings, building inspectors were questioned as witnesses. Each of their answers is evidence that the law was knowingly violated.
What the Testimonies Revealed
- Building Inspector Markku Aro: Admitted knowing the legal requirements but chose an “interpretation” that serves the citizen better. Knowingly bypassing the law is not interpretation.
- Building Inspector Tuomas Ellilä: Confirmed the practice of conducting final inspections on expired permits based on “regional interpretation.” Land Use and Building Act Section 143 is mandatory law – there is no “regional interpretation” for it.
- Technical Director Reima Ojala: Defended the procedure by referring to building control’s role and supervisory obligation. Supervisory obligation does not authorize breaking the law.
- Building Inspector Juha Kuokkanen: Described commissioning inspection practices from 2007. A long-standing wrong practice doesn’t make it legal.
Each of these statements is contrary to law. This is not about interpretations. This is about knowingly bypassing mandatory laws.
Land Use and Building Act Section 143: “If construction work is not started within three years… the building permit expires.”
Land Use and Building Act Section 153: “A building… may not be taken into use before… the final inspection has been held.”
These are not subject to interpretation. These are mandatory laws.
When an authority states they knew the legal requirements but acted contrary to them, it’s no longer just a mistake. This provides grounds to assess official liability and may fulfill criminal liability criteria.
Constitution Section 118
Constitution Section 118 is clear:
“Everyone who has suffered a violation of rights or harm due to an unlawful measure or omission by an official or other person performing a public function has the right to demand that they be sentenced to punishment and to demand compensation from the public entity or from the official or other person performing a public function.”
This is not a new law. This is not subject to interpretation. This is the Constitution in force.
This is not about expanding the rule of law. This is about applying it.
What Is the Price of Rule of Law?
If unlawful authority action goes without consequences, the message is clear: the law doesn’t need to be followed.
Two Options
- Option A: Authorities are accountable for their errors. Consequences are sufficient to prevent recurrence. Rule of law functions.
- Option B: Consequences are nominal or non-existent. Errors recur. Rule of law is just a word.
Constitution Section 118 guarantees the right to compensation for unlawful authority action. The law exists.
The question is whether it will be applied.
Rule of law is not free.
But its costs should not be borne by a private citizen.
Read the complete story →