The Finnish Government has confirmed that it will propose amendments to the Aliens Act that would remove state-funded legal counsel from the very first phase of an asylum application. Today’s announcement, published by public broadcaster Yle, means that, if Parliament adopts the bill, applicants would have to prepare their initial interview with the Finnish Immigration Service (Migri) without the assistance of a lawyer paid for by the state. Free legal aid would in future be available only if the case is appealed to an administrative court.
Interior-ministry officials argue that the shift merely aligns Finland with a more ‘minimum-level’ approach now taking shape in several EU countries. They point out that Migri is already obliged to provide general legal guidance and that special provisions will be put in place for particularly vulnerable applicants, including unaccompanied minors and victims of trafficking. The ministry also stresses that the change forms part of a broader austerity package designed to curb public spending on migration procedures and speed up decision-making times.
Employers and individuals looking for practical help in navigating Finland’s shifting immigration requirements may find it useful to consult VisaHQ’s dedicated Finland portal. The service aggregates the latest visa policies, offers document-preparation tools and can connect users to trusted legal resources—support that becomes especially valuable when official assistance is limited. More information is available at https://www.visahq.com/finland/
![Finland moves to scrap free legal aid at the first stage of the asylum process]()
Refugee Advice Centre lawyers and human-rights NGOs have reacted with alarm, warning that the first-instance interview is the single most decisive step in the asylum chain: errors or omissions at this point are rarely corrected on appeal. Legal-aid providers add that the move comes at a time when low, state-paid fee levels have already discouraged many private attorneys from taking asylum files, leaving applicants with fewer professional options.
For employers that sponsor humanitarian talent or offer work placements to refugees, the proposal could have concrete consequences. A negative first-instance decision—potentially more likely without counsel—would oblige organisations to reassess relocation timelines, mobility budgets and duty-of-care provisions. International assignees who are themselves in the middle of an asylum or family-reunification procedure should monitor the bill closely; once enacted, the new rules will apply to any application still under Migri examination.
The draft amendments are expected to be submitted to Parliament before the Easter recess. With the governing coalition holding a clear majority, legal-experts believe the changes could enter into force as early as the start of the third quarter of 2026. Companies with global-mobility programmes in Finland are therefore advised to review their policies on legal-fee support and to identify reputable pro-bono partners well in advance.
Interior-ministry officials argue that the shift merely aligns Finland with a more ‘minimum-level’ approach now taking shape in several EU countries. They point out that Migri is already obliged to provide general legal guidance and that special provisions will be put in place for particularly vulnerable applicants, including unaccompanied minors and victims of trafficking. The ministry also stresses that the change forms part of a broader austerity package designed to curb public spending on migration procedures and speed up decision-making times.
Employers and individuals looking for practical help in navigating Finland’s shifting immigration requirements may find it useful to consult VisaHQ’s dedicated Finland portal. The service aggregates the latest visa policies, offers document-preparation tools and can connect users to trusted legal resources—support that becomes especially valuable when official assistance is limited. More information is available at https://www.visahq.com/finland/
Refugee Advice Centre lawyers and human-rights NGOs have reacted with alarm, warning that the first-instance interview is the single most decisive step in the asylum chain: errors or omissions at this point are rarely corrected on appeal. Legal-aid providers add that the move comes at a time when low, state-paid fee levels have already discouraged many private attorneys from taking asylum files, leaving applicants with fewer professional options.
For employers that sponsor humanitarian talent or offer work placements to refugees, the proposal could have concrete consequences. A negative first-instance decision—potentially more likely without counsel—would oblige organisations to reassess relocation timelines, mobility budgets and duty-of-care provisions. International assignees who are themselves in the middle of an asylum or family-reunification procedure should monitor the bill closely; once enacted, the new rules will apply to any application still under Migri examination.
The draft amendments are expected to be submitted to Parliament before the Easter recess. With the governing coalition holding a clear majority, legal-experts believe the changes could enter into force as early as the start of the third quarter of 2026. Companies with global-mobility programmes in Finland are therefore advised to review their policies on legal-fee support and to identify reputable pro-bono partners well in advance.
