article 93 (2) Covenant. of the Constitution Act in respect of alleged violations of the 109. In response to other questions, the representative explained that Finland did not have a system of constitutional review by the judiciary; it was up to the Constitutional Committee of the Parlisment to comment on the compatibility of proposed legislation with the Constitution. Once legislation had been enacted, courts were bound to apply it without questioning its constitutionality. The difference between decree6 and laws was that the former were issued by the President or the Government and the latter by Parliament. The supreme Administrative Court had held that it was possible to apply the Covenant and that a court could therefore ignore a government decree on the basis of the Covenant's provisions, but the position of the Covenant in the hierarchy of norms in the Finnish legal system was still a matter of debate. The Incorporation Act merely stated that those provision6 of the Covenant which belonged to the domain of legislation should have the force of law. At present, a review was being undertaken to ensure that foreigners enjoyed constitutional protection equal to that of Finnish citizens. The rights of a person to liberty might be curtailed only to the extent necessary for the fulfilment of the purpose of his detention. The Minister for Foreign Affairs had recently said that Finnish view6 or concept6 concerning human rights or democracy should not be used as criteria for punishment or reward when deciding on development cooperation activities, 110. Referring to the separation of the Provincial Administrative Courts from the Provincial Administrative Boards, the representative said that this had occurred at the logistic and administrative levelst a major purpose of the change had been to emphasise, especially in the public mind, the judicial function and independence of those COUrt6. The admini6trative judges secured their independence in the same way as judge6 in the ordinary courts; they had full tenure of office, which wa6 more comprehensive than in the case of state officials, and they could not be subjected to disciplinary proceedings, There were many different remedies which overlapped to some extent, but the Government Considered it important for individuals to be able to choose among cases, decision6 were still them. With regard to remedies in certain specific The request for compensation in such case6 had been made on the pending, basis of claim6 that the injury suffered by the petitioner wa6 undue deprivation of liberty, but since the damage suffered wa6 not a material one it was difficult to 866866 monetary compensation, 111. In connection with that issue, members of the Committee wished to know whether the new Self-Government Act for the Aalana Islands had been enacted by Parliament. 112. In reply, Aaland Islands Parliament was year, with the the representative said that the new bill in respect of the had been submitted to Parliament on 31 May 1990. The debate in continuing and was expected to finish towards the end of the new law entering into force in the course of 1991. 113. Witk. regard to that issue , members of the Committee asked what the current status was of the bills relating to states of public emergency -28-