Finland opens criminal investigation into Google over forest cleared for AI data centre

Finland’s police have opened a criminal investigation into Google after hundreds of hectares of forest were cleared for a planned artificial intelligence data centre before the environmental checks required by Finnish law had been finished. The case, announced by police in the northern city of Oulu on Thursday 29 October 2026 and reported around the world over the following two days, has turned one of Europe’s biggest technology investments into a test of how far a country will go to hold a global company to its own environmental rules.

The investigation centres on Tuike Finland, Google’s Finnish subsidiary, and on work at a site near the town of Muhos, in northern Finland. Police say the company cleared and drained forest there before completing the environmental impact assessments that Finnish law requires before such work can begin. The case is being treated as environmental degradation, and officers are examining whether the company’s actions broke Finland’s Water Act and caused environmental damage.

No charges have been laid, and a police investigation is not a finding of wrongdoing. But the facts already established are striking: around 330 hectares of forest were cut at Muhos, about 200 hectares were cleared at a second site, and campaigners estimate that about 250,000 trees were felled at Muhos alone.

At a glance

What happened: Finnish police opened a criminal investigation into Google’s Finnish subsidiary, Tuike Finland, over forest clearing and drainage at a planned AI data centre site near Muhos before environmental impact assessments were complete.
Why it matters: The sites are part of Google’s $15 billion AI investment in Finland, its largest in Europe, and the case raises questions about whether big technology companies follow local environmental law when they build the infrastructure behind artificial intelligence.
What happens next: Police are expected to give an update in December 2026, but the investigation is expected to run into 2027, while Finland’s environmental regulator decides whether work at the sites can restart.

What the police are investigating

The Oulu Police Department said on Thursday 29 October that it had launched a criminal investigation into suspected breaches of environmental law at the construction site of the planned Google data centre in northern Finland. The announcement was first reported by the Reuters news agency, whose reporters spoke to the detective leading the case.

“We are investigating whether the company’s operations have breached the water act and resulted in environmental damage,” Detective Superintendent Kari Pakanen told Reuters. He added that a guilty finding could lead to a corporate fine, and he declined to say whether any individuals could become a target of the investigation.

Police said in a statement that early information had shown “ambiguities and shortcomings” in the drainage and water management at the Tuike site. That detail matters, because drainage is not a side issue in this kind of project. When forest is cleared and land is drained, water flows change. In Finland, where forests, wetlands and waterways sit close together, badly managed drainage can damage streams, lakes and the land around them. That is why the Water Act exists, and why the police are looking at water management as well as the tree felling itself.

The investigation is expected to take a long time. Police said they would give an update in December 2026, but that the investigation would extend into 2027. That timetable means the question of whether any law was broken will hang over the project for more than a year, even as the regulator decides separately whether the work can restart.

How the forest was cleared before the checks were done

Under Finnish law, large projects must complete an environmental impact assessment before work that changes the environment can begin. The assessment is meant to work out what damage a project might cause and how that damage can be avoided or reduced. It is, in simple terms, the step where a country checks the cost of a project to nature before the machines move in.

According to the authorities, that step was skipped. Tuike Finland carried out forest clearing and drainage at the planned site near Muhos before the environmental impact assessments required under Finnish law had been completed. About 330 hectares of forest were cleared at Muhos, and about 200 hectares were cleared at a second site at Otanmaki, near the town of Kajaani. Campaigners estimate that about 250,000 trees were felled at Muhos alone.

The regulator had already stepped in weeks before the police investigation began. On Tuesday 6 October, Finland’s Supervisory Agency, known as LVV, which oversees environmental permits and assessments, ordered Google to halt preparatory work that altered the environment at Muhos and at the second site. The agency had already told Tuike in May 2026 that environmental impact assessments had to be completed before logging could begin.

That sequence raises an obvious question: if the regulator had warned the company in May, why was the forest cleared anyway? Google’s answer, given by its Finland country manager Antti Jarvinen, was that the company had acted on “the best understanding we had of the legislation at the time”. He apologised for what had happened. The company has also said it stopped preparatory work at both sites after receiving the regulator’s letters on 6 October and would “fully comply” with its requests. Whether work can restart is now up to LVV, which must decide on the permits; its spokesperson said it was unclear how long that might take.

Google’s response

Google has said it will cooperate with the police investigation and keep its focus on maintaining compliance at its sites. “We will cooperate with the investigation announced by the Oulu police on October 29 and will continue to focus on maintaining compliance at our sites,” a Google spokesperson said.

The apology from the company’s Finland chief is the most striking part of the response. Large technology companies rarely apologise in public for environmental problems, and Jarvinen’s comment that the company acted on its best understanding of the law at the time suggests Google believed its reading of the rules was correct. That reading is now being tested by the police and the regulator, and the outcome will show whether the company’s understanding matched what Finnish law actually requires.

Google has been in Finland for a long time. It has run a data centre since 2011 in a converted paper mill in the coastal town of Hamina, cooled with seawater. That history is part of why the Muhos case has surprised people in Finland. This is not a company new to the country or unfamiliar with its rules.

Why Finland wanted the investment

The two sites are part of a plan announced by Google in September 2026 to invest $15 billion in artificial intelligence infrastructure in Finland. The company described it as its largest investment in Europe. The plan covers data centres, improvements to the electricity grid, and clean energy and battery projects to power services such as Gemini, Google’s AI assistant, as well as Search, Maps and YouTube.

Finland has become one of Europe’s leading destinations for data centres, and the reasons are easy to understand. The country has a cool climate, which makes it cheaper to keep computer equipment from overheating. It has low-carbon electricity, much of it from nuclear, hydro and wind power. And its government has actively encouraged AI projects, presenting Finland as a stable, well-connected place to build the infrastructure that artificial intelligence needs.

Prime Minister Petteri Orpo supported the Google plan when it was announced in September, saying the deal would be a boost for the economy and playing down concerns that it would use up energy and push up power prices. But the mood changed after the forest clearing came to light. On Wednesday 28 October, Orpo told parliament that Google would have to “learn” from the incident and follow the law.

The bigger question: what countries get in return

Beyond the police investigation, the Muhos case has started a wider debate in Finland about what a country should demand from the technology companies that want to build there. That debate was put plainly by Aki Enkenberg, who heads technology policy at Finland’s foreign ministry. Speaking in a personal capacity, he said the behaviour of Google was “being condemned by the government”, but that it had not dimmed Finland’s appetite for data centres.

“Practically speaking, we haven’t been very good at asking for something in return. That’s more and more emerging as an issue,” Enkenberg said. “We should ask not only for infrastructure investment but also for R and D (research and development): becoming part of the ecosystem here in Finland, establishing research centres, establishing new partnerships, bringing in talented people.”

His point is a simple one. A data centre is, in many ways, a big shed full of computers. It uses a lot of electricity and water, it takes up land, and once it is built it does not employ many people. The value for the host country is less obvious than the value for the company. Enkenberg’s argument is that Finland should use its appeal as a place to build data centres to win more than just the buildings: research jobs, partnerships with Finnish universities and companies, and a real role in the technology being developed, not just a place to house it.

Finland is not the only country asking these questions. Australia is grappling with the same issue, and its federal government is drafting legislation to regulate the sector. The pattern is the same in both countries: governments want the investment, communities want the rules enforced, and companies are learning that the welcome is no longer unconditional.

What the power grid and the petition say

There is another reason the Muhos case matters beyond the forest itself, and it is about electricity. AI data centres are among the main drivers of a projected rise of up to 40 per cent in Finland’s electricity consumption in the coming years, if all agreed grid connection projects go ahead, according to grid operator Fingrid. That is a huge increase for a country of fewer than 6 million people, in a country similar in size to Germany.

Finnish authorities are considering applications for 145 new data centres. If even a large share of those are built, the demand for power, water and land will grow sharply, and so will the pressure on the planning system that is supposed to check each project before building starts. The Muhos case suggests that system can be tested, and that the checks can come too late, after the trees are already down.

The petition signed by more than 90,000 people shows that the public is paying attention. Finland has had less vocal opposition to data centre building than other places, including the United States, partly because the country is large, the population is small, and there has been room to build. The petition suggests that patience is not unlimited, and that people want clearer rules before more forests are cleared.

For Google, the immediate cost is delay and damage to its reputation in a country where it has invested for years. For Finland, the cost is a harder question about how to keep attracting investment while making sure the rules are followed. The police investigation will answer the narrower question of whether the law was broken at Muhos. The wider question, about what Finland asks for in return, will be answered in parliament, in the regulator’s offices, and eventually at the ballot box in April 2027.

Frequently asked questions

What is Google accused of in Finland?

Police are investigating whether Google’s subsidiary Tuike Finland broke environmental law by clearing and draining forest near Muhos before completing the environmental impact assessments required by Finnish law. Officers are examining whether the work breached Finland’s Water Act and caused environmental damage. No charges have been laid, and an investigation is not a finding of wrongdoing.

How much forest was cleared?

About 330 hectares of forest were cleared at Muhos, and about 200 hectares were cleared at a second site at Otanmaki, near Kajaani. Campaigners estimate that about 250,000 trees were felled at Muhos alone. Finland’s environmental regulator ordered work to stop at both sites on 6 October 2026.

What happens if Google is found to have broken the law?

Detective Superintendent Kari Pakanen told Reuters that a guilty finding could lead to a corporate fine. He declined to say whether any individuals could become a target. Separately, Finland’s Supervisory Agency, LVV, must decide whether to grant the permits that would allow work at the sites to restart.

How big is Google’s investment in Finland?

Google announced in September 2026 that it would invest $15 billion in artificial intelligence infrastructure in Finland, which the company described as its largest investment in Europe. The plan covers data centres, electricity grid improvements and clean energy and battery projects to power services such as Gemini, Search, Maps and YouTube.

Why does Finland attract so many data centres?

Finland has a cool climate, which helps keep computer equipment cool, and low-carbon electricity from sources such as nuclear, hydro and wind power. The government has also actively encouraged AI investment. But data centres use large amounts of electricity: grid operator Fingrid has said Finland’s electricity use could rise by up to 40 per cent in the coming years if all agreed grid connections go ahead.

Will the investigation stop data centre building in Finland?

There is no sign of that. Finland’s foreign ministry technology policy chief said the case had not dimmed the country’s appetite for data centres, and the government still wants the investment. What may change is what Finland asks for in return, with officials arguing the country should demand research centres, partnerships and skilled jobs as well as the buildings themselves.

Conclusion

The criminal investigation into Google’s forest clearing at Muhos is, on its face, a local story about a planning rule and a patch of northern Finnish forest. But it captures a much larger tension of the artificial intelligence age. The companies building AI need land, power, water and permission at a scale never seen before. The countries hosting them want the jobs and the investment, but they also have laws written to protect forests, water and communities, and voters who expect those laws to be followed.

Finland’s answer so far has been to enforce the rules and keep the door open at the same time. Whether that balance holds will become clear when police update the case in December, when the regulator decides on the permits, and when Finns vote in April 2027. Until then, 330 hectares of cleared forest near Muhos stand as a reminder that in the race to build artificial intelligence, the checks are supposed to come before the chainsaws, not after them.

This article is for general information and education only. It is not legal or financial advice.

Sources

• https://www.byteseu.com/2487408/ (Bytes Europe, 31 October 2026)
• https://www.tbsnews.net/worldbiz/europe/finland-launches-criminal-probe-land-clearance-google-data-centre-1587601 (TBS News, 30 October 2026)
• https://q106fm.com/2026/10/29/finland-launches-criminal-probe-of-suspected-environmental-damage-at-google-data-centre-site/ (Reuters via Q106, 29 October 2026)