Inquiry concerning the justification of the activities of the Prosecutor's Office and the Security Police Board (KaPo) (No. 528)
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
Date: 2024-03-18 19:04
Total Speeches: 54
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 1h 8m
AI Summaries: 54/54 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
At the center of the agenda is Inquiry No. 528, presented to the Riigikogu on June 5, 2023, concerning the justification of the activities of the Prosecutor's Office and the Security Police Board, submitted by Varro Vooglaiu, Kert Kingo, Kalle Grünthal, Arvo Alleri, Evelin Poolamets, Leo Kunnas, Rene Koka, Henn Põlluaasa, Martin Helme, Mart Helme, Rain Epler, Ants Froschi, Jaak Valge, Mart Maastik, Priit Sibul, and Riina Solman. Varro Vooglaiu, who has risen to the Riigikogu podium to present the report, represents the questioners, and the discussion focuses on the legality, accountability, and oversight mechanisms of the activities of the Prosecutor's Office and the Security Police Board, including raising awareness of the risks of abuse of power and increasing legal clarity. The second item on the agenda is also an inquiry, concerning the suspicion of violating restrictions on proceedings in connection with the case involving Priit Humal and Parvel Pruunsild, and raises questions regarding the creation of damage, reputational harm, accountability, and the principles of the rule of law. The ensuing discussion highlights doubts regarding the independence of KAPO (the Security Police) and the Prosecutor's Office and the effectiveness of oversight. It will also discuss possible consequences and the need for clarity and a better understanding of the principles of the rule of law. In summary, the goal of the agenda is to clarify the legality of the proceedings, the control mechanisms, and the transparency and accountability of police and prosecutorial activities within the framework of restoring public trust.
Decisions Made 1
No decisions were made – the agenda item concluded without specific decisions.
Most Active Speaker
Most active speaker: ehjpLK1FIak; position: other (represents the representative of the inquiry/parliamentary questioner, not a separate party position).
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Riigikogu will discuss Interpellation No. 528, submitted on June 5, 2023, by several members of the Riigikogu, regarding the justification of the activities of the Prosecutor's Office and the Security Police Board. Varro Vooglaid is scheduled to deliver the report.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid submitted a formal inquiry regarding the justification of the activities of the Prosecutor's Office and the Security Police Board, raising two main questions concerning the Kajar Lember and Humal–Pruunsild cases: how to interpret the violation of the restriction on proceedings, and if a person is not convicted by a court decision, who bears responsibility for the damage to reputation.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi thanks the members and calls upon the esteemed Minister of Justice, Kalle Laanet, to answer the questions posed by the interpellators.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet confirmed that the Prosecutor's Office must ensure the legality of pre-trial proceedings, directs the proceedings, and is responsible for ensuring that all procedural actions are lawful. Furthermore, the Minister is prohibited from interfering with or commenting on ongoing criminal cases, while simultaneously stressing the clarity of operational restrictions and the accountability of officials, as well as the necessity of administrative oversight.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Vice-Chairman thanks the assembly and calls upon Mart Maastik to pose his questions.
Mart Maastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mart Maastik compared the case involving Tõnis Mölder with the Slava Ukraini case and claimed that in the former instance, authorities went to the hunter’s premises with nearly ten masked individuals and automatic weapons to conduct a search. Meanwhile, no searches have been carried out regarding Johanna-Maria Lehtme so far, nor has her computer or phone been seized. As a member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), he asked whom he should approach to get answers as to why these approaches are so different.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet stated that for every proceeding, law enforcement bodies jointly select the procedural tactics, which must be agreed upon by the police and the prosecutor’s office. He noted that apprehension is primarily the prerogative of the police, while the prosecutor evaluates the legality of the detention. Although the specific cases vary, he hopes the initiated internal review will provide answers to numerous questions.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Toomas Kivimägi invited Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart to speak.
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
Profiling Eesti Keskerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart asks where the line lies regarding intervention in the work of the Prosecutor's Office and who is qualified to assess that, whether the Minister of Justice is obligated to respond to inquiries, and how they can collectively restore public trust in the justice system following the reputational damage that surfaced in the media, taking into account that the minister has taken responsibility and resigned.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet said that in order to restore trust, society and the legal system must understand why certain actions were taken and why criminal proceedings were initiated, and that, through the cooperation of all parties, the forms of future criminal procedure must be discussed, and clarity must be provided on how to honestly earn that trust.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi called upon Martin Helme to speak.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme criticized the independence of the Prosecutor's Office, asserting that courts have repeatedly found legal violations and the Prosecutor's Office fails to implement internal disciplinary measures. This raises the question of who would provide oversight if the Prosecutor General is taking direction from the minister.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Under current law, the Minister of Justice may initiate official supervision and disciplinary proceedings. If there are clear and demonstrable grounds constituting a disciplinary offense by state prosecutors or the Prosecutor General, the process must be conducted through the Legal Affairs Committee, and ultimately, based on the existence of those grounds, the government may proceed with dismissal.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
At the beginning of the talk, Ants Frosch was invited onto the stage.
Ants Frosch
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Ants Frosch is expressing concern regarding the consistent application of the principle of proportionality, citing the Parvel Pruunsild court case where the inviolability of private life and constitutional rights are being violated, whereas no such measures have been applied in the case involving the NGO Slava Ukraini.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet acknowledged that the proportionality is indeed questionable, and when he inquired about it, he was told that he had interfered in the Slava Ukraini proceedings.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi asks Kert Kingo to come forward and speak.
Kert Kingo
AI Summary
Kert Kingo emphasizes that in the early spring of 2021, Indrek Tibar was appointed justice attaché to the USA by the decision of a three-member commission. One member of this commission was Prosecutor General Andres Parmas, who is a long-time friend of Tibar. Kingo argues that Parmas’s decision to grant Tibar this favorable position aligns with the conditions outlined in § 11 of the Anti-Corruption Act, raising the question of why no proceedings were initiated regarding this matter, and who should have initiated proceedings against Parmas.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet stated that he knows Indrek Tibar from their time in the police force and cannot confirm who made the decision for that three-member commission or who the other two members were. However, Tibar is an experienced specialist in that field, and if signs of a violation of procedural restrictions were to emerge, the Ministry of Justice's first step would be to draw attention to it, although he is unable to comment in more detail.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
We invite Varro Vooglaid to the stage.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid posed two questions: the first, whether the restriction on supervision over the Prosecutor's Office, pursuant to § 9 of the Prosecutor's Office Act, is appropriate, where exactly it applies, and whether it is even possible to carry out such supervision; and the second, whether there is a single known case in the last ten years where a prosecutor has been personally held accountable for a charge presented in court proving to be unfounded.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet stated that the current system is structured this way, and there is an ongoing discussion about whether the ministry should have the right to oversee specific proceedings (namely, surveillance activities and the issuance of permits). He added that the scope of independence and how it is manifested is a subject of debate that needs to be addressed by both society and the parliament.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Speaker Toomas Kivimägi called upon Rain Epler to deliver a speech.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler thanked the Presiding Officer and the Minister, noting that last week’s broadcast had been interesting, and praised the Minister’s specific and honest answer to the ornithology question. He then asked what format or procedural method could be used to find out where Reinsalu knew what he said or asked the State Prosecutor on December 12.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet said that if criminal proceedings were initiated and certain investigative steps were carried out, it would probably become clear how Urmas Reinsalu knew exactly what I did or where I was. However, as far as he knows, no such proceedings exist, so the question remains unanswered.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Toomas Kivimägi asked Mart Helme to speak.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Mart Helme states that President Karis wants a thorough debate regarding the independence of the Prosecutor's Office and is concerned about the potential emergence of political control, seeing this as a fear of the security police and the entire justice system, and stressing the need for those participating in the discussion to be bolder.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This is simply an expression of gratitude.
Mart Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
He points out that the mechanism for abusing power has fallen into the hands of arbitrary rule, and asks what you think about it.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet stressed that the line between intervention and asking questions must be clear. Ministers must not interfere in specific proceedings, but they are permitted to ask questions. Furthermore, there is a need for democratic oversight processes and understandable laws, a necessity illustrated by the Kaj Lember case.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Short cue for inviting to the stage: Kalle Grünthal.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Grünthal spoke about the scandal last October, where journalists accused him of renting an apartment he did not actually live in. He claimed that the journalists had been given instructions on what to look for, referencing Eesti Ekspress's descriptions of how Parmas handled his conversations, and finally asking whether the prosecutor's office uses journalism as a tool to shape public opinion.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet confirmed that many people knew which apartment he used and where he stayed overnight in Tallinn, and that it was not secret—everything was included in the declarations. However, the exact path by which the data reached the computer or phone will become clear over time, and he does not want to be mistaken.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
This is just a request addressed to Helle-Moonika Helme.
Helle-Moonika Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Helle-Moonika Helme praises the minister for certain steps but accuses the legal system of double standards, noting that a misdemeanor proceeding has been initiated against the minister—a situation where others would have faced criminal charges—and suggests that law enforcement agencies might even be grateful to him/her.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Minister of Justice Kalle Laanet emphasized that it is not right to be grateful for the initiation of proceedings, and that society needs a clear understanding of the essence of restrictions on official actions and the type of procedure that is applied in the event of their violation.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Speaker Toomas Kivimägi calls upon Jaak Valge to speak.
Jaak Valge
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Jaak Valge highlighted the trial of Oleksandr Chernov in Ukraine, noting suspicion that the offense may have been fabricated, and asked whether Estonia has taken or intends to take steps to ensure that this whistleblower is not punished in retaliation.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet said that he received an email regarding Tšernov's risks and forwarded it to the prosecutor's office, but his understanding is based on feedback received from third parties. In December, he had a telephone conversation with the Ukrainian Minister of Justice, during which he described the situation and requested assistance in obtaining information. Following that, feedback from third parties indicated that the approach to the Tšernov proceedings has become more adequate.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Henn Põlluaas is invited to speak.
Henn Põlluaas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Henn Põlluaas thanks the Chair and the Minister, emphasizing that the oversight procedure should have begun long ago and that there are many points of contention. However, he wants to know whether the deep state exists and what the respondents' stance is on this issue.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
He said that the deep state is a question of interpretation: officials stay put while ministers come and go, and if you are a young minister holding office for the first time, you have to think carefully before putting your signature on anything, because you are tested by experience and knowledge, although he doesn't dare to confirm the existence of the mystical deep state.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Vice-Speaker Toomas Kivimägi invites Rene Kokk to speak.
Justiitsminister Kalle Laanet
AI Summary
Justice Minister Kalle Laanet described the telephone call he had with the Prosecutor General on February 29, following the government session, during which he said he could not stay long at the session and had to immediately drive to Pärnu County, promising to call after the session ended. The call was put on hands-free, and when he spoke about the 'bird kingdom,' the prosecutor asked again what exactly was meant, to which he provided clarification.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Toomas Kivimägi emphasizes that the silence is significant, thanks the minister, announces that there are no further questions, opens the discussions, and invites Varro Vooglaid to the floor.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid emphasizes that although laws require officials to compensate for damages they cause, no one has been held accountable in the last ten years, nor is responsibility being assumed for significant reputational harm. Consequently, accountability in the public service must be seriously enhanced, and action must be pursued even more actively.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The purpose of this address is to request three additional minutes.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid stressed that there must be personal accountability for the abuse of public authority; otherwise, a sense of impunity will emerge, and changes will fail to take effect.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Toomas Kivimägi thanks [the floor/previous speaker] and requests that Kalle Grünthal be granted three additional minutes.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Grünthal asserts that a deep state exists in Estonia, whose "fist" consists of the Prosecutor's Office, the Security Police (KAPO), and the Central Criminal Police, and which is used to sideline or push someone aside. He cites two examples: his own refueling story and Kalle Laanet's resistance to the Prosecutor's Office. Furthermore, he accuses the Prosecutor's Office of lacking oversight and influencing witnesses, emphasizing the critical need for honest and responsible state power.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
The Vice-Chair thanks [the previous speaker] and invites Kert Kingo to speak.
Kert Kingo
AI Summary
Kert Kingo accuses the Prosecutor's Office of repeated violations of the law and negligence concerning abuse arising from the code of ethics, and claims that internal supervision is lacking and the Prosecutor's Office has become politicized, which threatens the Estonian rule of law.
Aseesimees Toomas Kivimägi
AI Summary
Thank you very much, everyone; we have concluded the consideration of this agenda item.