The "evidence" was that in one of the text messages from the aide he claimed he was forewarding the order from Hautala.
I admit that this could be a lie, Soininvaara, another politician from the Green party, did point that out as a possibility in a talk show but immediately shut up about. Which does highlight a problem the Greens have now: their every attempt to save face makes them seem more dishonest. I mean they did reveal the messages that incriminated them to bullying the company, but they did not reveal the worst message which had the threat of firing the CEO. They claim that this was an mistake and that their initial draft had that message had that one as well, but to the public it just seems like more lies.
I am likely to believe them since this does seem like a case where accidents and incompetence could achieve the same as evil (and incompetence.)
And now if it did turn out that the aide was lying, how are they going to prove it without making it look like they are using him as a scapegoat?
(Personally, after reading more about it the original offense wasn't that serious but all this backpedaling and coverups kept making it worse.)