Legal expert: Chancellor of Justice must assess size and frequency of Orpo’s election funding

The central question in the review of Prime Minister Petteri Orpo is not whether the election donations were legal, but whether their size and repetition could affect his impartiality in government decisions.

That is the assessment of Olli Mäenpää, an emeritus professor of administrative law, who examined Orpo’s response to a request for information from Finland’s Chancellor of Justice. The inquiry concerns Orpo’s role in decisions on state support for Garden Helsinki and ownership and financing arrangements involving Valmet Automotive.

“

It is true, as Orpo says here, that both individual and party election funding are completely legal. The Chancellor of Justice will have to assess whether there are any special features, mainly related to the amount and frequency of the funding.

Orpo said he received 3,000 euros from Afortus Oy for the 2025 municipal elections and 1,000 euros from Pontos Oy for the 2021 municipal elections. He also referred to 10,000 euros that the National Coalition Party received from Pontos during the 2023 parliamentary elections.

“

The big question here is what significance election funding has for disqualification when it is directed at one important person who exercises decision-making power.

An investigation by Iltalehti found that Kokkila had supported the National Coalition Party and various candidates over several years with about 123,000 euros in total. Mäenpää said Orpo’s personal funding was more relevant to the impartiality assessment, although party funding could also matter if it had been especially substantial.

Orpo described his relationship with Kokkila as an ordinary professional acquaintance that did not by itself create a conflict of interest. He said he learned about Valmet Automotive’s situation in April 2025 and later attended two events with Kokkila, including a private dinner hosted by Kokkila and his wife. Mäenpää said such meetings do not normally establish disqualification in Finland, where prominent figures often encounter one another. The Chancellor of Justice may still seek further information before reaching an assessment.

“

You may dine with acquaintances; that does not yet establish disqualification in normal decision-making.