Finnish astronomers acquitted in defamation case related to protesting harassment

Speaking out against harassment is in the public interest and should be encouraged rather than punished, a Finnish court declared today. That message was part of a ruling dismissing criminal charges against two astronomers who had protested the hiring of a U.S. scientist found to have committed gender-based harassment in a previous academic job.

“I hope this case will set a precedent,” says Syksy Räsänen of the University of Helsinki, one of the two defendants.

Räsänen and Till Sawala, also at the University of Helsinki, were part of a campaign aimed at overturning the University of Turku’s decision nearly 5 years ago to hire astrophysicist Christian Ott as a postdoc. Prior to that, Ott had been a faculty member at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) when the university concluded in 2015 he had harassed two graduate students. The case received widespread media coverage.

Ott resigned from Caltech in August 2017 and in January 2018 signed a 2-year contract to work at Turku’s Tuorla Observatory. News of his appointment triggered widespread protests in Finland and beyond, including a letter to senior Turku administrators organized by Räsänen and Sawala urging that he not be hired. A week later Turku canceled the agreement.

Ott then sued Turku for breach of contract and eventually received more than $150,000 in damages from Turku and the University of Stockholm, which in December 2017 had agreed to hire him as a postdoc before withdrawing the offer. In October 2018, Ott filed a criminal complaint in Finland against Räsänen and Sawala, which led to a police investigation.

Last year, state prosecutors charged Räsänen and Sawala with “aggravated defamation” and “aggravated dissemination of information that violates [Ott’s] privacy.” Today’s ruling followed a 4-day trial last summer in Turku district court.

The 25-page ruling essentially upholds what the scientists did in trying to block the hiring. The defendants managed to “systemically bring information concerning harassment and discrimination … to the attention of a large number of people,” the judges wrote (as translated by the lawyer for one of the defendants). “This is not prohibited, let alone a criminal offence. On the contrary, this can be considered a matter of such public interest [that] you must be able to openly discuss.”

Räsänen and Sawala say they are “relieved” by the acquittal and believe the judges are sending a broader message to the scientific community. “No one should have to fear fines or a prison sentence for simply speaking out against harassment based on widely and reliably reported facts,” Räsänen says.

“It has been a very long and draining process,” Sawala adds. “Going forward, what we really need to focus on is the impact of harassment, and how to prevent it, not on the rights and privileges of someone who has harassed students.”

Ott declined to comment, saying he first needed to “review and analyze” the judge’s decision once an English version was available.

In their ruling, the two district judges said Räsänen had improperly used the word “sexual harassment” in three social media posts describing Caltech’s finding against Ott. But that error didn’t constitute defamation, they said, because there was no malicious intent and because Räsänen stopped using the phrase—which was included in several news stories—once he learned it was incorrect.

“There were strong reasons to consider [those reports] to be true and to trust the news in question,” the judges ruled. As a result, the judges noted, “the defendants have not intentionally presented any false information or innuendo” about Ott.

In dismissing the charges, the judges also rejected the prosecutor’s request for damages to compensate Ott for the negative publicity generated by the protests. The acquittal also means the state will pay the defendants’ legal fees.