Draft law amending the Police and Border Guard Act (670 SE) – first reading
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Date: 2025-06-18 23:55
Total Speeches: 66
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 1h 7m
AI Summaries: 66/66 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The Riigikogu debated, as agenda item 21, the first reading of Draft Act 670 on supplementing the Police and Border Guard Act, initiated by Riigikogu members Peeter Tali, Ando Kiviberg, Anti Haugas, and Mati Raidma. The purpose of the draft bill was to establish clear and lawful regulation for the use of Number Plate Recognition Cameras (NPRC) in the activities of the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), thereby reducing the existing legal ambiguity that had arisen based on the 2009 regulation. Presenter Anti Haugas emphasized that the cameras are a vitally important tool for detecting, preventing, and precluding crimes, and that legal clarity must be achieved quickly to maintain police credibility. He confirmed that the draft bill addresses previous remarks by the Data Protection Inspectorate and the Chancellor of Justice regarding the need for regulation at the level of law.
The debate was heated, focusing on the infringement of people's fundamental rights. Opponents, particularly Urmas Reinsalu (Isamaa) and Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart (Centre Party), criticized the bill as a hastily prepared "botched draft" that attempts to retroactively legalize unlawful activity and grants the PPA overly broad rights, including the possibility of identifying individuals in vehicles and using data to "terminate disturbances of public order." Supporters (Eesti 200, SDE) stressed that NPRC is a modern and necessary tool for solving serious crimes (citing examples of rape cases) and that the closure of the cameras by the Minister of the Interior was a mistake that endangers Estonia's security during the summer period. The Legal Affairs Committee proposed concluding the first reading so that the draft bill could be amended during the summer. The proposal by Isamaa and the Centre Party to reject the draft bill was voted down.
Decisions Made 3
The proposal by the Isamaa faction and the Estonian Centre Party faction to reject Draft Bill 670 at the first reading failed to gain support (12 in favor, 48 against).
The first reading of Bill 670 was concluded.
The deadline for the submission of amendments was set for 17:00 on August 1st.
Most Active Speaker
The most active speaker was the bill's rapporteur, Anti Haugas, who presented the content of the draft law and answered numerous questions regarding the legality of using license plate recognition cameras, data protection, and security. His position was supportive of the draft bill (other).
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Riigikogu is proceeding to agenda item 21: the first reading of Draft Act 670 on the amendment of the Police and Border Guard Act, which was initiated by Riigikogu members Peeter Tali, Ando Kiviberg, Anti Haugas, and Mati Raidma. Anti Haugas has already reached the rostrum to present the report.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that the purpose of the draft legislation is to clearly regulate the use of license plate recognition cameras in the activities of the Police and Border Guard Board, reduce legal ambiguity, strengthen the protection of personal data, and permit the use of this tool for the detection and prevention of crimes, along with a clear procedure for data retention and transfer.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas introduced a draft law that establishes clear and lawful regulation for the use of the Police and Border Guard Board's number plate recognition cameras, aiming to eliminate the existing legal ambiguity, strengthen the protection of personal data, and restore to the police an essential tool for detecting and preventing crimes and locating wanted persons.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The speech expressed great thanks to the audience, announced that there would be some questions, and Ants Frosch is now starting.
Ants Frosch
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Ants Frosch said that he had thoroughly reviewed the draft bill and then posed a question regarding the impact analysis, pointing out that Chinese-made analog cameras had been widely used in Romanian border areas, which had been hacked by Russian military intelligence. He then asked whether the impact analysis should also have indicated how much it would cost to replace these Chinese-made cameras in Estonia.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that he was unaware of the Romanian incident and needs to provide an answer regarding which cameras originating from that country are used by the Police and Border Guard Board and other Estonian institutions. He added that if the draft bill reaches the second reading, he believes this topic deserves to be addressed by the Riigikogu and its committees.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi calls upon Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart.
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Kovalenko-Kõlvart stated that the hastily submitted draft bill infringes upon fundamental rights because it permits the photographing of both vehicles and the people in their vicinity, and allows this data to be stored in the police register—a practice the Chancellor of Justice has critically reviewed. Furthermore, since the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board) is unable to blur faces, the question arises of how to move forward in this situation.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that while the draft bill restricts people's rights, the use of license plate recognition cameras may increase the public sense of security. He added that Section 7 requires a clear elaboration between the two readings, and the committee is prepared to hear and discuss the viewpoints of the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), the Data Protection Inspectorate, and the Chancellor of Justice.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The address is merely a request to invite Aivar Kokk to speak.
Aivar Kokk
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Speaker Aivar Kokk claims that the draft bill was prepared by the PPA (not by him), and that it would result in the Tax Board losing all rights and the ability to use data collected from approximately 80,000 photos for tracking the locations of people's cars, which raises privacy and security concerns.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that the draft bill was prepared by the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs, not by the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), although the PPA is aware of it and did not draft it. He submitted it himself, with the aim of reducing legal uncertainty and allowing work to be done between the two readings during the summer. And although the Tax and Customs Board will not be granted the right to use license plate recognition cameras, the bill concerns the Police and Border Guard Board and security institutions, including the Estonian Internal Security Service and the Foreign Intelligence Service.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi suspends the sitting because the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee wishes to intervene with a question to the Chair, and asks Ando Kiviberg to take over the proceedings.
Ando Kiviberg
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Ando Kiviberg expresses concern that when a question is posed to the presenter, a colleague present in the room interrupts the response, and he emphasizes that the respondent must be allowed to finish their answer completely.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi confirmed that emotions and a little debate are part of the process. He is ready to allow one or two interjections, provided they do not disturb the rapporteur, and to intervene if necessary, citing the recent experience of the French National Assembly.
Andre Hanimägi
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Andre Hanimägi emphasizes that cameras are a necessary tool for the PPA, and thanks to them, criminals have been brought to justice. He demands their swift return to the toolbox and the immediate reintroduction of the cameras, while simultaneously questioning whether the Interior Minister's decision to shut them down was correct or if it seriously impacted Estonia's security.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas acknowledged that we face legal ambiguity regarding the use of license plate recognition cameras. He stated that he personally would not have halted their use and believes that the 2009 regulation is sufficient, provided it is clarified and the relevant POLIS provisions are incorporated into law. He added that there are six parties in the Riigikogu, and the interior ministers representing all of them have been in government over the last 16 years.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi calls on Toomas Uibo to speak.
Toomas Uibo
Profiling Eesti 200 fraktsioonAI Summary
Toomas Uibo expresses concern that speed cameras may be able to identify occupants inside vehicles, and questions whether this is justified or if the practice of photographing people within vehicles should be discontinued.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
The police utilize different types of cameras: speed cameras are positioned slightly lower and provide a better view of who was inside the vehicle, whereas license plate recognition (LPR) cameras are mounted higher up and focus primarily on the license plate itself. The photos are stored in a database linked to the vehicle’s registration number, not to the identities of the people. Although individuals captured in the photos may be identified later during the proceedings, the police do not initially collect data related to personal identities, and identifying a person from an LPR camera photo is difficult.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi invited Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart to speak.
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart emphasizes that the discussion must focus on people's fundamental rights and proportionality, criticizes one-sided argumentation, and claims that the use of facial recognition cameras was halted due to the violation of fundamental rights, and the bill should not retroactively legalize those illegally installed cameras. She refers to the analysis by the court and the Chancellor of Justice and asks whether access for 1,300 officials is proportional.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Although automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras may increase people's sense of security, their use must not constitute a restriction of fundamental rights unless regulated at the level of law. The draft legislation addresses this regulatory gap, emphasizing proportionality. These cameras may only be used based on a threat assessment, primarily for the detection, prevention, and investigation of crimes, and their use remains prohibited in the case of minor misdemeanors.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi invited Lauri Hussar to the stage.
Lauri Hussar
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Lauri Hussar noted that the draft bill is primarily aimed at ensuring security and utilizing modern technological capabilities in the information society, while simultaneously setting clear frameworks for the protection of people's fundamental rights, and he asked what the specific provisions are that protect these rights.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that the draft bill covers these problems and sets out the conditions for making inquiries. It details the requirements for data retention (45 days) and log storage, and provides the opportunity to verify the legal basis for up to two years. Furthermore, it ensures supervision through internal control, the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board), and the Data Protection Inspectorate, thereby guaranteeing the protection of fundamental rights and maintaining public safety in a cost-effective manner.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This address is a brief request to invite Peeter Ernits to the stage.
Peeter Ernits
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Peeter Ernits is asking what terrible consequences could result from not using the cameras, whether any analysis or calculations have been done regarding them, and how quickly this could be enacted into law.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stresses that license plate recognition cameras enable the rapid identification of a vehicle's movement path and the halting of crimes—something that would be difficult to accomplish solely through patrol surveillance. He cites examples like robberies, sexual offenses, and drug trafficking to ensure prevention is more effective.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi invites Aivar Kokk to speak.
Aivar Kokk
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Aivar Kokk criticizes the effectiveness and transparency of the surveillance system, pointing out that according to the law currently in force in Estonia, the prosecutor's office must obtain a court order. He references approximately 80,000 inquiries concerning those camera recordings, highlights the lack of explanations from the Tax and Customs Board, as well as six so-called incorrect inquiries, and questions how many crimes were actually solved this way and how it is possible to track people using license plate recognition without a court order.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Gratitude was expressed in the speech.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that he might slightly doubt why the Tax and Customs Board made certain inquiries, but the statistics provided in the explanatory memorandum indicate that 3% of the inquiries were related to misdemeanor proceedings and searches for fugitives, 65% were related to serious or latent crime, and 32% were inquiries related to other criminal proceedings and information verification. That is to say, these inquiries are linked to criminal activity, not misdemeanors or lighter disciplinary infractions.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi called on Peeter Ernits to speak.
Peeter Ernits
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Peeter Ernits thanks, asks permission to ask, and says that he is waiting for a moment.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi expresses definite optimism, saying, "We'll manage it."
Peeter Ernits
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Peeter Ernits asks whether something even worse could happen in the coming months, and whether there is an analysis that weighs the threats and their constitutional aspect.
Peeter Ernits
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Peeter Ernits questions the assertion that nothing terrible has happened within the span of one month, stressing that the threat (including sexual perversion and the movement of narcotics) could accumulate in the following months. He further inquires whether a comprehensive analysis of potential dangers has been carried out and whether the constitutional dimension has been considered whatsoever.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that the number of crimes against persons in Estonia has decreased and the use of license plate recognition cameras has been suspended. However, there is a possibility that some crimes might not be solved quickly enough without their use. Consequently, a draft bill must be prepared over the summer. This bill, developed in cooperation with the Riigikogu, the PPA, the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs, the Ministry of the Interior, the Chancellor of Justice, and the Data Protection Inspectorate, aims to reach a solution that can be adopted during the second reading in September, as the 2009 regulation must be updated and codified into law.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu is invited to speak to begin the address.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu asks whether the constitutional right to personal inviolability also encompasses the right to personal confidentiality, what the concept of 'violation of order' means, and whether cameras could be used to identify individuals who are not paying the car tax.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that he did not have the explanatory memorandum available, and Urmas Reinsalu clarified from the chamber that the matter concerned Section 34 of the Law Enforcement Act.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Toomas Kivimägi expresses his thanks and states that there will be further speeches, adding that his own statement requires clarification.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that Urmas Reinsalu, the then Minister of Justice, could read out the precise definition of a violation of order during his speech, but Haugas himself does not have that legal definition immediately available and hopes that Reinsalu will clarify exactly what it is later on.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The speech is simply a request: "Anti Allas, please!"
Anti Allas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Allas asks who in the Riigikogu has actually been wronged, whether the debate clarified how many people have been harmed, and why there is still a desire to protect the scoundrels.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas stated that the majority of inquiries concerned the grounds for serious or very serious criminal activity. Thirty-two percent (32%) of the inquiries were related to other criminal proceedings and the verification of information, and three percent (3%) were related to misdemeanor proceedings and search operations. Furthermore, the draft bill would provide a legal basis for searching for missing persons, even though some of the inquiries are not related to criminal activity.
Anti Haugas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Anti Haugas presented the statistics on inquiries, noting that although the overwhelming majority (65%) concerned serious or covert crimes, it is important to emphasize that the draft legislation also provides a basis for searching for missing persons, such as individuals traveling by car, thereby extending the use of the measure beyond mere criminal proceedings.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanked the audience, informed them that there were no questions, and requested that Madis Timpson present the discussion held in the steering committee and the decisions reached there.
Madis Timpson
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Madis Timpson summarized the Justice Committee meeting, which discussed the first reading of the number plate recognition camera bill. This was done to avoid the summer recess and allow work on the bill to proceed during the summer. Although the Ministry of the Interior and the Data Protection Inspectorate supported the initiative, discussions arose regarding the Chancellor of Justice's proposal to exclude the use of photographs of occupants inside vehicles. Furthermore, the opposition criticized the manner in which the bill was initiated and the inadequate protection of fundamental rights. Despite this, the committee decided by consensus to submit the bill to the plenary, conclude the first reading, and set the deadline for amendments at 30 working days.
Madis Timpson
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Based on the Legal Affairs Committee meeting held on June 10, it was decided that the draft bill would proceed to its first reading in preparation for the summer recess, as the Riigikogu session is ending and a lengthy break should be avoided; compared to the draft bill initially proposed by the committee, there are two differences: the provision concerning the Tax and Customs Board has been omitted, and one section has been clarified regarding when the Police and Border Guard Board may take a photograph of a motor vehicle or trailer and record its registration plate using a camera; representatives from the Ministry of the Interior, the Police and Border Guard Board, the Office of the Chancellor of Justice, the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs, and the Data Protection Inspectorate were invited to attend the committee meeting; various viewpoints were highlighted within the committee, but a consensus decision was reached to include the draft bill on the plenary agenda for June 18, conclude the first reading, set the deadline for submitting amendments at 30 working days, and appoint Madis Timpson as the representative of the lead committee.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
On behalf of the Isamaa faction, Urmas Reinsalu is requested to take the floor in the Riigikogu and be granted eight minutes of speaking time, because a two-minute presentation is insufficient.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu warns against the erosion of fundamental constitutional rights, sharply criticizing a draft bill that seeks to retroactively legalize the widespread identification of individuals (such as through license plate recognition cameras) for the prevention of vaguely defined public order infractions. He argues that this severely violates the right to privacy and confidentiality, and he proposes rejecting the bill, demanding a constitutional and clear approach from the government.
Urmas Reinsalu
Profiling Isamaa fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Reinsalu stressed that Estonia is a constitutional state and that the fundamental rights to the inviolability of private life and confidentiality must be protected. He called on parliament to reject the current draft bill, which would permit the widespread location tracking and data sharing of individuals, arguing that such a solution runs counter to the principles of constitutional culture and the protection of human rights. He concluded that the issue demands clear, high-quality handling that fully accounts for constitutionality.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi thanks you and, on behalf of the Eesti 200 faction, introduces his colleague Stig Rästa.
Stig Rästa
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Stig Rästa emphasized that Estonia must use cameras transparently and in a way that is strictly limited by law, aiming to improve security and prevent crimes, not to threaten privacy. He called on the Riigikogu (Parliament) to finalize this legislation quickly.
Stig Rästa
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Stig Rästa emphasizes that the bill under discussion, which regulates the use of license plate recognition cameras, is an essential step toward a safer Estonia, providing law enforcement with modern tools for preventing and detecting crimes. He rejects claims that privacy is being jeopardized, confirming that the use of the cameras is strictly limited by law. He asserts that this represents a value-based choice that ensures transparent and balanced legislation, where security and privacy go hand in hand, and calls on the Riigikogu to immediately support the bill.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Rapporteur thanks you and, on behalf of the Social Democratic Party Faction and by authorization, addresses esteemed colleague Andre Hanimägi.
Andre Hanimägi
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Andre Hanimägi said that there are 175 license plate cameras in Estonia, which focus solely on the license plate and have helped solve serious crimes. He stated that although they currently have a legal basis, legislative clarity must be provided this autumn, and the suspension of the system must not be considered, so that deterrence and legal certainty can continue.
Andre Hanimägi
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Andre Hanimägi passionately defends the system of 175 license plate recognition cameras, stressing that it is a vital tool for the police in solving serious crimes, citing the capture of a child rapist as an example. He dismisses claims of a surveillance society, pointing instead to the far more extensive monitoring conducted via phones and shopping centers. Most critically, he slams the Interior Minister's decision to switch the system off, calling it a dangerous mistake that strips the PPA (Police and Border Guard Board) of an essential instrument, especially given that the court has not ruled the system illegal.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi asks for one more minute.
Andre Hanimägi
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Andre Hanimägi stated that although the bill caused confusion and its introduction was missed, the coalition ultimately supported it, and it is necessary to improve its legal framework and the system's operation, focusing on a substantive discussion rather than an ideological dispute over monitoring systems.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, representing the Estonian Centre Party faction, expresses deep gratitude and requests eight minutes of additional time.
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart expresses strong concern that the proposed draft bill expands the collection of personal data and the use of public sector surveillance cameras without adequate debate, a proper risk assessment, or independent oversight, and therefore recommends its rejection.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi informed the chamber that the lead committee wishes to conclude the first reading of Bill 670, and a vote will be held in the hall on the proposal by the Isamaa and Estonian Centre Party factions to reject its first reading.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The first reading of Proposal 670 failed to gain support: 12 members of the Riigikogu voted in favor, 48 against, and 0 abstained. The deadline for submitting amendments is 5 p.m. on August 1st, and that concludes my final gavel strike of the spring session.