Draft law amending the Act on the Election of Municipal Councils (639 SE) – First Reading
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
Date: 2025-09-11 02:01
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 58
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 18m
AI Summaries: 58/58 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The Riigikogu began debating the first reading of Draft Law 639, initiated by the faction of the Estonian Conservative People's Party (EKRE), concerning amendments to the Local Government Council Election Act. Presenter Martin Helme explained that the bill aims to resolve the confusion, which has lasted nearly 30 years, regarding the interpretation of the residency requirement for candidacy in local elections. Although traditionally the basis has been the registration in the population register, court rulings have "tied the situation in a knot," requiring proof of actual permanent residence, which has led to complaints, criminal cases, and the removal of council members. EKRE's initial proposal was to completely abolish the residency requirement, similar to Riigikogu elections. However, following inter-factional consultations, Helme proposed a compromise: to stipulate in the law that the register entry itself is sufficient grounds for determining residency, thus avoiding the need to verify the circumstances of actual habitation.
Pipi-Liis Siemann, representing the Constitutional Committee, provided an overview of the committee's discussion, which addressed the candidate's connection to the community and the issue of "decoy candidates." The committee decided to reject the bill during the first reading. During negotiations, Lauri Laats (Centre Party) raised the issue of local government revenue base, as registration is linked to income tax collection. Despite the committee's proposal to reject the bill, the Centre Party announced that it would vote in favor of the bill so that it could proceed to the second reading for amendments. The leading committee's proposal did not receive support in the vote, and consequently, the first reading of the bill was concluded.
Decisions Made 1
The Riigikogu voted down the leading committee’s (the Constitutional Committee’s) proposal to reject Bill 639 during its first reading (1 vote in favor, 26 against). The first reading of the bill was concluded, and the deadline for submitting amendments was set as September 24 at 5:15 PM.
Most Active Speaker
The most active speaker was Martin Helme (EKRE), who presented the content of the draft bill, explained its necessity for ending the legal confusion, and answered several questions. His position is better.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Arvo Aller announced that they are proceeding to the first reading of draft bill 639, initiated by the EKRE faction, concerning the amendment of the Local Government Council Election Act, and that Riigikogu member Martin Helme will serve as the rapporteur.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme emphasizes the need to amend the Local Government Council Election Act, as the current ambiguous residency requirement has led to litigation and criminal proceedings. He therefore requests that the bill not be rejected during the first reading, allowing a cross-party preferred amendment to be introduced during the second reading. This amendment would establish the data in the Population Register as the basis for residency, thereby putting an end to mutual complaints and confusion.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme explained that the ambiguous interpretation of the residency requirement for local elections—which distinguishes the "permanent residence" stipulated in the law from the actual register entry—has led to legal chaos, mutual complaints, and the initiation of criminal proceedings. He stressed that it is therefore imperative to amend the law to establish the register entry as the sole basis for residency, and he asked the Riigikogu not to reject the bill during its first reading, in order to quickly resolve this widespread problem.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme notes that the residential address requirement for local elections causes confusion and leads to mutual complaints and the initiation of criminal cases, and suggests as a solution either abolishing the residential address requirement or legally stipulating that the residence data in the register should serve as the basis.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Arvo Aller opened the round of questions, referencing the audience's submissions, and subsequently gave the floor to Mart Helme.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Arvo Aller said that Mart Helme also had a question and asked him to present it.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme asserts that the goal of the dual mandate law—to allow Riigikogu members to also run in local elections—is clearly contradictory to the existing residency requirements. He emphasizes his desire to run in Pärnu, which, in his view, demonstrates the fallacy of these feudal restrictions.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme sharply criticizes the residency restrictions for local elections, arguing that they are relics of the feudal age and stand in obvious contradiction to the so-called ‘two-chair law’ championed by progressive parties, which allows Riigikogu members to also run in local governments. He cites his personal desire to run in Pärnu as an example.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme is sharply criticizing the conflict arising between the residency restrictions placed on members of the Riigikogu and the so-called "dual mandate law." He emphasizes that these "relics of the feudal age" prevent him from running for office in his beloved hometown of Pärnu, before asking the waitress for her opinion.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme criticizes the "two chairs law" as formalistic and detrimental, arguing that registering one's place of residence in Tallinn determines taxes, schooling, and transport, and could make it impossible to run for office in Tallinn, despite the fact that he was born and has lived there.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme sharply criticizes the legal ambiguity that arises between the formal registration of residence (done in Tallinn to receive taxes and benefits) and where people actually live, emphasizing that this discrepancy creates a situation where even long-term residents cannot run for the city council, calling it a "circular firing squad" that harms all parties involved.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme, who opposes the dual mandate law, stresses that the current legal ambiguity surrounding the formalities of residence registration creates a situation where people utilize Tallinn's benefits while simultaneously residing in their country homes, which, through court rulings, leads to the loss of the right to stand for election and generates confusion that damages political culture and affects all political parties.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Arvo Aller calls Lauri Laats.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Lauri Laats commended the chair and the rapporteur of the session, subsequently highlighting that the issue of residency registration under discussion is directly linked to the revenue base and financial stability of local governments.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Lauri Laats stresses that if a council member represents the local community and also works within the council's executive structure, the income tax should be directed to the local government's revenue base. He then asks how the collection of this revenue will be guaranteed once the bill is passed.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme confirmed his complete agreement with the preceding statement, doing so both monosyllabically and resolutely.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Lauri Laats stresses that because council members represent the local community, their income tax should, in any event, be directed to the municipality's revenue base. He then asks how the retention of this principle will be ensured if the bill currently under discussion is passed.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme proposes abolishing the residency restriction for candidates in local government elections, allowing them to run in any municipality they wish, similar to Riigikogu elections. He emphasizes that if this solution is unsuitable, the law must at least clearly specify that the strictly decisive factor will be the entry in the population register, rather than the subjective assessment of the actual place of residence that is currently taking place.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme describes a proposal that would abolish the residence-based requirement for candidacy. Under this plan, any Estonian resident could run for office in the municipality of their choosing, provided they are registered in a specific municipality somewhere in Estonia, and their income tax revenue would be directed to that registered municipality.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
All questions have been asked, and next, Pipi-Liis Siemann, a member of the Constitutional Committee, will summarize the discussion.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Arvo Aller concluded the round of questions, confirming that there were no further questions for the presenter, and subsequently gave the floor to Pipi-Liis Siemann, a member of the Constitutional Committee, so that she could summarize the discussion that had taken place in the lead committee.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The Constitutional Committee discussed the draft bill, highlighting the questions that arose during the debate and the issue concerning the candidate's ties to the community, and decided to place the draft bill on the plenary session agenda, propose its rejection, and appoint the speaker here, Pipi-Liis Siemann, as the representative of the lead committee.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Pipi-Liis Siemann, the representative of the Constitutional Committee, explained that the committee discussed at length the draft bill concerning candidates' ties to the community and the issue of dummy candidates, and decided, despite acknowledging the problem, to propose rejecting the bill in the plenary session.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Arvo Aller announced that the time had arrived for questions and subsequently invited Rain Epler to the podium.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The Deputy Speaker announces that Rain Epler will be asked one more question.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler criticized his colleague for the typical reluctance among Reform Party members to share their personal opinions, emphasizing at the same time the importance of doing so for the public, and then directly requested that the colleague state his personal position on the matter being discussed.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler pointed out that members of the Reform Party often fail to share their personal opinions during discussions, even though people would like to hear the personal views of their elected representatives, and he asked how this situation should be handled.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Pipi-Liis Siemann expressed her personal opinion, emphasizing that residential registration and the official registry entry have traditionally been sufficient proof of a person's connection to their place of residence and region, serving as the basis for both participating in elections and receiving benefits. She concluded that, due to recent developments within the legal framework, this principle requires a longer and more thorough discussion.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Pipi-Liis Siemann expresses her personal opinion, emphasizing that because residency registration has for many years served as sufficient proof of one's connection to the local municipality—both for voting and for receiving benefits—this existing practice requires a longer and more thorough discussion in light of recent developments in the legal framework.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
He noted that entries in the residency register have served as sufficient proof of residence, and these affect both elections and various benefits, and in light of recent developments in the legal framework, the discussion requires more extensive treatment.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Arvo Aller presents a request to Lauri Laats.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Lauri Laats stated that resolving the funding base for local governments could prove to be an obstacle for many political groups, and he inquired whether this was the primary concern for his own faction, or if there were other problems associated with the draft legislation.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Lauri Laats raised the issue of resolving the local government's revenue base, noting that the fear of the revenue base shrinking is the main stumbling block preventing many factions from supporting the draft bill. He then requested clarification on whether this financial uncertainty also poses an obstacle for the rapporteur's own faction.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Pipi-Liis Siemann said that the topic was not discussed at length in the committee, but there should be a genuine connection with the local government and likely a regulation that helps prevent the movement of 'party hoppers' between political parties.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Pipi-Liis Siemann states that although the commission did not discuss the topic at length, there is a prevailing understanding that a local government representative should have a genuine connection and commitment to the region. Therefore, regulation is likely necessary to prevent the "touring" of so-called decoy candidates from hopping from one locality to another.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Arvo Aller announced that Evelin Poolamets had also arrived, but Rain Epler has a procedural question for the presiding officer.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Arvo Aller noted that although Evelin Poolamets had joined the list of speakers, Rain Epler had a procedural question to put to the Presiding Officer.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler used an informal moment to crack a joke about his colleague Laats, who had forgotten the name of the other colleague—Epler—after the summer vacation.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler describes a funny situation where his colleague Laats, after returning from summer vacation, forgot his name and simply said, “Rain.”
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler made a rather informal remark, pointing out how colleague Laats was struggling a bit after the summer break, having momentarily forgotten colleague Epler's name.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The manager announces that they are unable to help due to procedural reasons, and requests the assistance of Evelin Poolamets.
Evelin Poolamets
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Evelin Poolamets draws attention to the committee rapporteur’s previous confusion regarding the new court ruling, which alters the requirements for providing evidence, given that mere residential registration is no longer sufficient. She then inquires whether the rapporteur has now clarified for himself the consequences of the ruling and the actual necessity of the draft bill.
Evelin Poolamets
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Evelin Poolamets pointed out that there was confusion over the issue in the committee, and there was no understanding that it must now be proven that a mere registration of residence is not sufficient evidence. She then asked if they had grasped what the new regulation and court decision entail, and how necessary this draft legislation truly is.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Pipi-Liis Siemann confirms her earlier position, criticizing the current situation where rural municipality and city secretaries are uninterested in checking people's actual permanent place of residence, considering this a major systemic flaw.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
He stated that his opinion was well aligned within the commission, and that the rural municipality and city secretaries they encountered were never interested in verifying anyone's actual place of residence or permanent abode, which, in his view, is a deficiency of the current situation.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The speech includes a brief request for Anti Allas to speak.
Anti Allas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Allas asked what the arguments were for rejecting the draft bill, who supported them, and how it was recommended to measure who was present where and for how long, as well as whether any specific metric or standard emerged for measuring this accurately.
Anti Allas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The questioner sought to know what arguments lay behind the rejection of the draft bill, which the majority supported, and inquired in detail how exactly the time and location of individuals' presence were intended to be measured, asking whether a specific metric or standard had been developed for this purpose.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The speaker confirmed that although the committee members did not provide specific justifications ("criteria") for rejecting the draft bill, the six members who voted against are clearly listed in the minutes, even though their individual reasons were not recorded.
Pipi-Liis Siemann
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The speaker confirmed that no specific criteria were provided in the committee, and at that time, six committee members voted in favor of rejecting the draft bill, and they were not asked to have their reasons separately entered into the minutes.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Arvo Aller announced that there were no further questions, opened the floor for debate by the factions, and invited Lauri Laats to speak on behalf of the Estonian Centre Party faction.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The Chairman concluded the round of questions and opened the floor for debate among the factions, granting the first speaking slot to Lauri Laats, the representative of the Estonian Centre Party faction.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
The speaker stressed that the bill currently under discussion is moving in the right direction, helping to restore the credibility of politicians and institutions, an area currently facing serious issues. Although the bill’s current draft does not garner complete support, it will be voted through to the second reading, where the necessary amendments will be proposed.
Lauri Laats
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Lauri Laats stated that the lack of trust in politicians and institutions is an issue, and while the bill is moving in the right direction toward restoring that trust, he does not support its precise current form. Therefore, he will vote in favor of sending it to the second reading, promising to submit amendments afterward.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Arvo Aller announced that the discussions would be concluded and that the leading committee's proposal to reject Draft Bill 639 at the first reading must be put forward, a proposal which must then be voted upon and preparations for which must commence.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The Chairman of the Session closed the debate, as there were no further requests to speak, and subsequently put to a vote before the members of the Riigikogu the leading committee’s proposal to reject Bill 639 at the first reading.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The Chairman announced that the Riigikogu rejected the proposal on the first reading by a vote of 1 in favor and 26 against, and set the deadline for submitting amendments as September 24th at 17:15.
Aseesimees Arvo Aller
AI Summary
The proposal was rejected: 1 Member of Parliament voted in favor, 26 against, and 0 abstained. The first reading is concluded. The deadline for submitting amendments is September 24th at 17:15, and we have now completed the tenth item on the agenda.