Interpellation concerning problems related to the restriction on official actions (No. 320)
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
Date: 2024-03-18 18:24
Participating Politicians:
Total Speeches: 37
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 40m
AI Summaries: 37/37 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
Today, the Riigikogu addressed an agenda item concerning an interpellation submitted by members of parliament Varro Vooglaid and Kalle Grünthal on May 13th last year, which focused on problems related to the implementation of the conflict of interest restriction. The query raised questions regarding vague definitions, the resulting scope of the restriction, and issues of legal clarity, illustrating the topic in light of historical cases—such as the connections involving Kajar Lember and Mary Kross, and observations made by Chancellor of Justice Ülle Madise. The main point was that if the provision governing the conflict of interest restriction is not sufficiently specified, ambiguity may arise in controlling actions specifically taken against an official or persons related to them, making the interpretation of court decisions uncertain. The second part of the discussion covered the parliament’s position and the government’s plan: the Ministry of Justice is considering and planning to make the conflict of interest regulation clearer and narrower. The central objective of this analysis will be strengthening the principles of the rule of law and ensuring clarity in anti-corruption measures. It appeared that the debate also included specifying the exception to the conflict of interest restriction for doctors and clarifying the definition of a related person, alongside increasing transparency across the entire legal system.
Decisions Made 1
No final amendments to legal acts were adopted on the agenda; however, during public discussions and debates, the Minister confirmed that a thorough analysis is planned regarding the regulation of restrictions on proceedings (or: conflict of interest regulation). If necessary, a draft bill will be prepared to clarify and narrow the definitions (including the concepts of 'official,' 'related person,' and other connections), thereby achieving the desired transparency and prevention. The deadline for drafting the bill and its precise content are still being finalized and have not yet been adopted.
Most Active Speaker
The most active speaker was Kalle Laanet, the Minister of Justice in the Riigikogu (pid ehjpLK1FIak), who represented the government's views. His role was to lead the discussion on the necessity of clarifying the regulation of procedural restrictions and to outline the government's plans for analysis and drafting a bill. Position: right (right-wing politician, member of the government).
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The second item on the agenda addresses the query submitted by Varro Vooglaid and Kalle Grünthal on May 13th of last year concerning issues related to the restriction on proceedings, and Mr. Vooglaid is requested to serve as the presenter.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid, through an interpellation, raised the issue of the vague definition of the restriction on proceedings as a threat to the principles of the rule of law. He referenced the Kajar Lember case and the 2018 remarks made by the Chancellor of Justice, and posed two questions to the minister: whether the problem is serious and requires immediate attention, and if so, what plan is in place for its elimination or mitigation.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Speaker Lauri Hussar offers his thanks and invites the Minister of Justice, Kalle Laanet, to the Riigikogu rostrum to answer the interpellation.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet said that the regulation concerning restrictions on official actions is broadly construed and requires clarification, narrowing, and thorough analysis in order to maintain the effectiveness of corruption prevention, ensure transparency, and prevent the normalization of corruption.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanks the Minister and notes that quite a few questions have been submitted to him, before calling on Martin Helme.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme assertively seeks confirmation that the prosecutor's office operates honestly and impartially, and that the Prosecutor General’s working methods are honest and impartial, and asks how many heads of the administrative areas of the ministers secretly record them.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet stated that the administrative supervision of the Prosecutor's Office, which is set to be initiated in the coming weeks, will provide the first-ever comprehensive overview of its management and development. Furthermore, it will evaluate how efficiently and effectively the Prosecutor's Office has performed its duties, noting that this specific type of internal oversight has never been carried out since the restoration of independence.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar called Varro Vooglaid to the stage.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid debates the concepts found in Section 11 and Section 7 of the Anti-Corruption Act, specifically addressing the definition of a related person. This definition encompasses an individual sharing a common household, as well as a person whose influence occurs outside their official capacity or whose power of direction is subordinate to the official. He questions whether such a definition adheres to the principle of legal clarity.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet acknowledges that legal clarity is very confusing, and when looking at the law as a whole, sufficient clarity is lacking. Furthermore, § 11 subsection 3 point 6 indicates that the restriction on proceedings is not applied in certain cases.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar addressed Anti Poolamets with a request.
Anti Poolamets
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anti Poolamets raises the point that administrative offense proceedings regarding the same issue were opened long ago, and the 8-euro haircut incident demonstrates illogical treatment. He then asks whether he himself handled this topic in the Riigikogu, and whether he personally confirmed that no relatives were involved and that nothing violated the restrictions on proceedings (conflict of interest rules).
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet said he currently doesn't have an answer and needs to check whether it is recorded in the Legal Affairs Committee protocols, since the issue may have concerned the second half of the 2000s.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman asks Mart Helme to take the floor.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme suspects that the Prosecutor's Office, which is supposed to oversee corruption, is itself politically and morally corrupt and is carrying out political orders, and he asks what should be done in such a situation.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet stated that the legal process first requires establishing the validity of hypotheses, and the court ultimately determines what connections were present. However, the clearest answer is provided by a system of reasonable oversight mechanisms established and implemented in a democratic state, because failing to utilize them creates shortcomings that must be highlighted.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar asks Rain Epler to come and take the floor.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler asks whether the Prosecutor’s Office operates by creating one or two documents in every drawer to provide answers to ministerial inquiries, referencing misdemeanor proceedings initiated a couple of years ago, and questioning whether his suspicion is unfounded.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
He said that the issue is very complicated to comment on, hopes that such a thing doesn't happen in a rule-of-law state like Estonia, and added that time will tell how things stand and in what sequence the events unfolded.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invites Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart to speak.
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
The speaker raises the question of whether the suddenly discovered violation of the operational restriction indicates an inconsistent interpretation of the provisions over time and the need for greater legal clarity, adding a deep concern that there might be a file somewhere about all of us that someone could use to eliminate individuals.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
He emphasized that there should not be a file kept on every individual, and that legal certainty is necessary. Furthermore, all parties must have a very clear understanding of what we actually aim to achieve, by what methods, what harmful consequences we are attempting to prevent, and how this is supposed to be accomplished.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar thanked the minister, stated that there were no further questions, and opened the floor for debate, inviting Varro Vooglaid, the representative of the interpellators, to the Riigikogu rostrum.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid stressed that the definition of a “related person” in the anti-corruption law is vague and does not comply with the principles of the rule of law. He demanded that the Prosecutor’s Office be held accountable—suggesting, for example, that the prosecutor who brought the case to court should lose their position.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Speaker thanks [the previous speaker], and next invites Mart Helme to the Riigikogu rostrum.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme asserts that the Estonian legal system lacks a genuine principle of equal treatment, arguing that corruption and political influence allow laws to be applied unequally in certain cases, resulting in proceedings being terminated without penalty—citing examples such as the wasting of taxpayer money and the self-appointment of a party colleague to the European Court of Auditors. This, he concludes, echoes Orwell's famous dictum: all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
I apologize, it is not possible to create an accurate summary from this fragmented excerpt; please provide the entire speech.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme asks for one more extra minute.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman decides to grant Mart Helme one minute of extra time.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme warns that if you get caught between the teeth of the deep state, you will be ground to dust, and this is not a rule of law state, because vague laws allow for the arbitrary application of justice.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanked [the previous speaker] and invited Anti Poolamets to speak next.
Anti Poolamets
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anti Poolamets claims that the Prosecutor's Office operates systematically and under political influence, citing the Mary Kross case and other examples where the principle of expediency is used to protect the spouses of politically connected individuals and waste taxpayers' money, and calls for accountability and reforms of the Prosecutor's Office.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar requested three minutes of extra time.
Anti Poolamets
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anti Poolamets claims that no member of the Riigikogu is protected and that the prosecutor's office is politicized, citing the Parmas case and Lavly Perling's entry into politics as examples, and referring to a new political culture.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi offers his thanks and notes that the Minister has also expressed a desire to speak during the proceedings, and invites colleague Kalle Laanet to take the floor.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet emphasized that the Prosecutor's Office must ensure quick and effective proceedings, and if evidence is not found, the investigation must be terminated, not simply left in a desk drawer. Furthermore, a collegial decision-making process and improving organizational management are crucial.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Thank you very much, Mr. Minister; the consideration of this agenda item is concluded.