Photo by Bermix Studio on Unsplash

In Finland, the sale of sexual services is not a crime. Yet for many foreign sex workers, the law still carries serious risks. Under Section 148(6) of the Aliens Act, third-country nationals—those from outside the EU—can be deported if there are reasonable grounds to suspect they are selling sexual services. Each year, dozens of individuals face deportation for this reason.

The Finnish Immigration Service’s own guidelines state that deportation on this basis should not result in an entry ban. Yet in practice, deportation is often followed by a one- to three-year prohibition on re-entry.

This provision creates a striking contradiction: something that is legal for one group becomes grounds for expulsion for another. Similar laws exist in Sweden and Norway, reflecting a broader Nordic trend of unequal treatment based on nationality.

This is also a question of human rights. The law violates sex workers’ sexual autonomy and their right to pursue an occupation. It also infringes on the right to equal treatment. Notably, sexual autonomy is mentioned multiple times in the legislative documents—but not in the sense that unequal treatment of sex workers might infringe on their rights. Rather, sex work itself is framed as a violation of the sex worker’s autonomy.

The documents do not explain how voluntary sex work is assumed to harm the seller’s autonomy. Instead, they reflect an automatic association between selling sex and human trafficking or procuring—contexts where a person’s autonomy is clearly violated. Yet individuals who sell sex by choice should, within the scope of their sexual autonomy, have the right to do so.

My research explores how this specific provision came into law—and what its consequences are in practice. I examine the legislative discussions that led to its adoption, asking whether lawmakers considered the potential harm it creates. Were they aware of the risks it poses for foreign sex workers? Did they attempt to reduce those risks?

Fear of deportation not only silences victims—it also undermines public safety and justice. If people are afraid to report crimes, violence goes unchecked and perpetrators face no consequences. Deportation becomes a threat hanging over those already in vulnerable situations.

Preliminary findings suggest that these consequences were not seriously considered during the legislative process. The focus appears to have been primarily on immigration control. In doing so, the law creates a two-tier system—where fundamental rights apply unequally based on nationality.

This issue deserves more attention in both research and policymaking. Treating people differently under the law because of their immigration status contradicts Finland’s commitment to equality and human rights. The lack of public and academic discussion only deepens the invisibility of those most affected.

Reconsidering provisions like these—and listening to the people directly impacted—is essential for building a more just and inclusive society. We must ask: Is this really the kind of protection the law should offer?

About the author

Fanni-Lyydia Rapala is a master’s student in the final stages of her degree at the University of Turku. Her thesis explores the impact of Finland’s Aliens Act on foreign nationals who sell sexual services.
Contact: flrapa@utu.fi