Prosecutor General Raija Toiviainen has not yet taken any position on the Twitter message that has aroused the disapproval of MP Ano Turtiainen (ps). Toiviainen only found out about the case late in the afternoon at the end of his working day in other matters.

- It is too early to say anything about this yet, Toiviainen says.

He does not, therefore, take a position on whether the public prosecutor should consider the case at all.

On Wednesday, Turtiainen posted a Twitter post illustrated with a mocking image of George Floyd on his deathbed. In the United States, the death of the dark-skinned Floyd, who was killed in a police crackdown, began with protests and unrest that have now lasted for another week.

  • Read more: Basic Finnish Turtiainen mocked George Floyd, who died in the hands of the police

The combination of the picture and the text written by Turtiainen has been perceived by many as offensive to the memory of the deceased. In the picture, Floyd's face under the police's foot was dyed pink and the text had the text “Pink Floyd”.

In the accompanying text, Turtiainen wrote: "Have you noticed that the closer you are to 'equality' in welfare areas, the more there are brawls."

IS will not post a photo of this tweet because of its insult. However, a description of the message is necessary to assess the performance of the Member of Parliament.

The case could end up on the prosecutor's desk if the message had reason to suspect a defamation under criminal law.

Defamation may be convicted if false information or a hint of a deceased person is presented in such a way that the act is likely to cause suffering to a person close to the deceased.

Defamation is a criminal offense, so in general, its investigation would require a close claim for punishment. However, there is an exception to this.

- The public prosecutor can order the prosecution if a very important public interest requires it and if the crime has been committed using the mass media, Toiviainen says.

He emphasizes that he is speaking in general and not in the case of Turtiainen.

In the case of Turtiainen, a very important public interest would presumably be weighed against his position as a Member of Parliament.

The overall consideration would also be affected by the fact that Turtiainen's message was only visible to the public for a short time and he removed it from his own view.