Debate on the matter of significant national importance: "E-elections – a threat to democracy."
Session: 15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Date: 2024-05-09 13:01
Total Speeches: 138
Membership: 15
Agenda Duration: 3h 53m
AI Summaries: 138/138 Speeches (100.0%)
Analysis: Structured Analysis
Politicians Speaking Time
Politicians
Analysis
Summary
The Riigikogu debate addressed a matter of national importance initiated by the faction of the Conservative People's Party of Estonia (EKRE): "E-elections – a threat to democracy." Presentations were given by Varro Vooglaid (EKRE), information freedom and digital rights activist Märt Põder, Martin Helme (EKRE), and sworn attorney-at-law Paul Keres. The discussion focused on the lack of reliability, opacity, and uncontrollability of the e-voting system, highlighting that nearly 40% of the population does not trust the fairness of the elections. Vooglaid and Helme emphasized that trust must be based on verifiability, not faith, and criticized the government's desire to expand the system further (m-voting). Märt Põder pointed out specific technical and procedural shortcomings observed during the 2023 elections, including the inadequate preparation of the key generation computer and the counting of votes with invalid digital signatures. Paul Keres analyzed case law, noting that the Supreme Court has not provided a substantive assessment of the constitutionality of e-voting in 19 years, and proposed a reform of the right to appeal, allowing for popular complaints and extending deadlines. Coalition parties (Reform Party, Estonia 200) defended e-voting, citing high participation rates, Estonia's unique e-identity, and international audits, while accusing critics of political polarization. During the debate, the session time was extended until the agenda item was exhausted, but no later than 2:00 PM.
Decisions Made 2
Extension of the sitting until the agenda item is concluded, but no later than 14:00. (19 in favor)
The Riigikogu did not adopt the decision.
Most Active Speaker
Varro Vooglaid (dSDfxfKs4Jw) was the most active speaker, presenting the longest report and answering the most questions on the topic of the reliability of e-elections and the threat to democracy. His position is better.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
The Riigikogu is set to begin the debate on a matter of significant national importance initiated by the EKRE faction, titled “E-elections – a threat to democracy.” The discussion will feature presentations by Varro Vooglaid, Märt Põder, Martin Helme, and Paul Keres, along with a question-and-answer session. Following this, general debate and speeches by the factions will continue, but a final decision will not be adopted, and the sitting may be extended.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid emphasized that the Estonian democracy's trust in elections has significantly declined, and e-elections are insufficiently transparent and verifiable. Therefore, there is a need for a substantive, cross-factional discussion and concrete solutions to restore trust and preserve the legitimacy of the state.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas thanked the rapporteur, noted that there were quite a few questions, and invited Siim Pohlak to respond.
Siim Pohlak
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Siim Pohlak compares e-voting in Russia and Estonia, noting that both systems prioritize convenience. He points out that while in Russia e-votes were withheld and counted later, the government and the Reform Party in Estonia see no issue with this. Furthermore, the topic has been hushed up in the media, which begs the question: why?
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid emphasizes that although e-elections are widely used in Estonia and the convenience is significant, trust in the electoral process is of central importance for democracy, and nothing can replace it—not even low cost or higher participation rates.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas addresses Martin Helme and asks him.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme emphasizes that a healthy skepticism towards authority is normal, and trust in the Estonian state must not be taken for granted, because power invites corruption. Furthermore, confirming the election results, or at least offering the possibility of scrutiny, is necessary, but this is not being done.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid emphasizes that the burden of proving the integrity of elections rests with the organizer, not the skeptics, and if the system is not genuinely verifiable, the legitimacy of authority is lost, increasing the risk of distrust and protests.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas called Urmas Kruuse to speak.
Urmas Kruuse
Profiling Eesti Reformierakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Urmas Kruuse argues that the security of e-voting is not automatically less secure than paper voting, asserting that trust in democracy depends on human behavior, not technology. He criticizes the illusion of supreme trust placed in the paper system, concluding by asking, have you already burned your ID card?
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid stressed that e-elections are not verifiable from start to finish, arguing that trust in the electoral process depends on the system's actual verifiability, not merely on people's internal conviction. He also called for an open discussion in the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) using the OTRK format, where coalition members would ask him the most critical questions.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas invited Kalle Grünthal to the stage.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Grünthal emphasized that according to Article 60 of the Constitution, the election day is fixed, but e-voting and other forms of early voting already take place in February, and he asked how this article should be interpreted.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid emphasizes that the elections must be conducted exactly as stipulated by the Constitution (on the first Sunday of March), and that any schemes or interpretations that ignore or deviate from the Constitution must be avoided, as this is contrary to the principles of the rule of law.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas invites Jaak Valge to speak.
Jaak Valge
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Jaak Valge criticizes the assertion that the increasing proportion of e-voting indicates growing public trust, pointing out that trust is independent of the voting method and that results, whether electronic or paper-based, can be tampered with. He then asks for a comment on this assertion.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid claims that fraud can occur even if a person does not vote, and distrust in the e-voting system makes it difficult to say whether participation or abstaining changes the outcome. He highlights the influence of the deceased, used through system manipulations to increase voter turnout, and calls on coalition MPs, along with Andres Sutt, to hold a substantive discussion.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas invites Alar Laneman to speak.
Alar Laneman
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Alar Laneman emphasizes that fair and free elections are the foundation of democracy, and in the context of hybrid warfare, distrust in e-voting could significantly impact the nation's defense resolve.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid stresses that the legitimacy of state power and the integrity of elections are critical for national security. He argues that if people lack trust, they have no incentive to pay taxes or defend the country. Consequently, trust in the electoral process must be restored, and problems should be addressed openly rather than concealed.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Vice-Chairman Ratas invited Rene Kokk to speak.
AI Summary
Rene Kokk points out that about 40% of people do not trust e-voting. He stresses that to boost confidence, the proponents and relevant agencies must address concerns related to authentication, voting in nursing homes, and the use of the ID card, and clarify why they have remained silent thus far.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid asserts that the triumph of Estonian e-voting is an illusion, and trust in democracy must be the primary priority, which is why e-voting must be abandoned or restricted in order to restore confidence in elections.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
The speech is nothing more than a mere request to summon Kert Kingo.
Kert Kingo
AI Summary
Kert Kingo accuses the Supreme Court, the state electoral service, and the governments that were led by the Reform Party of not wanting to solve the problem, arguing that they prioritize trust over transparency and the resolution of technical and factual issues, while pointing to the former Reform Party IT minister who shelved the international audit.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid urged members of the Riigikogu to support a draft resolution that would appeal to the Venice Commission for an independent expert assessment regarding the compliance of the Estonian electoral system with the principles of democracy and the rule of law, emphasizing that the objective is merely to obtain an impartial evaluation and does not determine the reliability of e-voting.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas thanks the previous speaker and invites Märt Põdra, an activist for information freedom and digital rights, to the Riigikogu rostrum to deliver his report.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder, an activist for information freedom and digital rights, stated that observing the 2023 e-voting process revealed serious flaws. These included insufficient oversight of the network-based key generation and vote counting system, the improper removal of ballot slips from the ballot box, and the questionable counting of the last cast vote alongside incomplete ballot data elements. This demonstrates that e-voting is unreliable, lacks independent auditing, and operates without clear rules, which is why he cannot participate in the elections.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas asks the presenter if he needs a little more time.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
The speech focuses on the question of whether this is possible.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
That's possible, but we need to agree on the amount.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder, an information freedom and digital rights activist, briefly poses the question: "What is that recommendation?"
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Jüri Ratas stresses that he will not be doing their presentation, and they must deliver it themselves.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder, an activist for information freedom and digital rights, says that he can wrap things up in three minutes.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Chairman Jüri Ratas requests three minutes.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder, an activist for information freedom and digital rights, claims that the electoral commission violated the law regarding the verification of formal requirements and the validity of digital signatures, infringed upon electoral secrecy, and announced the result before the final processing of all complaints.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Jüri Ratas thanks the server, announces that the Q&A session is next and that there are quite a few questions lined up, and then invites Martin Helme to speak.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme noted that only one chunk of code is being audited, and there is no way to check whether it has been used or modified, or whether the rest of the system has been audited at all.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder, an activist for information freedom and digital rights, states that the auditing of Estonia's e-voting system is merely formal. He argues that the audit is limited only to checking checksums and the final decryption process, while overlooking substantive procedures such as the removal of repeated and double votes and the vote mixing process. Consequently, both individual and universal verifiability are absent, meaning the correctness of the election results cannot be reliably confirmed.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
The Deputy Speaker, Jüri Ratas, announced that we were moving on to the next item, and invited Varro Vooglaid to speak.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid said that the description is a complete shambles and does not meet the requirements of a state governed by the rule of law and democratic elections, that the auditing is merely formal and substantively deficient, and he asked how the Supreme Court can resolve such complaints if it lacks IT specialists.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder, an activist for information freedom and digital rights, strongly asserts that the oversight of e-voting is insufficient, that the assessment of technical and evidence-based claims was overlooked, that the legitimacy of the elections is at risk, and that the hastily processed draft bill 344 does not solve these problems.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Vice-Speaker Jüri Ratas invites Rain Epler to come forward and speak.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler emphasized that e-voting must be understandable and trustworthy for all citizens, not just for experts with specialized knowledge, and the focus should be on its comprehensibility and reliability, rather than technical complexity.
Infovabaduse ja digiõiguste aktivist Märt Põder
AI Summary
Märt Põder emphasizes that the claim made by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that the e-voting rules are "generally understandable" is not sufficient, and the Riigikogu (Parliament) and the Electoral Service must more specifically understand and audit all essential e-voting rules, because international assessments indicate deficiencies in cryptographic controls.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Deputy Speaker Jüri Ratas thanked the rapporteur and for his answers, declared the presentation time concluded, and invited Mario Kadastik to ask a procedural question.
Mario Kadastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mario Kadastik asked during the Riigikogu debate whether he had the right to a rejoinder, as the rapporteur had mentioned him repeatedly, both in the opening statement and when answering questions.
Aseesimees Jüri Ratas
AI Summary
Under the Rules of Procedure Act, you have the right to a rebuttal during the debate round, but that option is not available during the current question-and-answer session. Therefore, we will move on, and I invite Martin Helme to the speaker's stand.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme claims that e-elections are neither verifiable nor transparent, arguing that the legitimacy of democracy hinges on openness and monitorability. Consequently, he calls for the cessation of e-elections until their security and proper control can be guaranteed.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanked the presenter and opened the Q&A session, first inviting Ants Frosch to speak.
Ants Frosch
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Ants Frosch claims that Estonia's e-voting system is essentially naked and its trustworthiness is questionable. He refers to the OSCE/ODIHR report, which contains six specific requirements and recommendations, and asks whether we will continue with both domestic and international cooperation to ensure its functionality, or if we should completely abolish e-elections.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme asserts that e-voting can never be simultaneously anonymous and verifiable, and for this reason, it should be stopped, as even Finland and other examples have demonstrated that it doesn't work, and the Estonian vote is not truly secret.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invites Jaak Valge to the stage.
Jaak Valge
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Jaak Valge is seeking comment regarding the fluctuations in trust in e-voting, referencing studies conducted by the Skytte Institute between 2005 and 2023. He notes that trust has periodically risen and fallen and wishes to know what causes these variations.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme argues that the e-voting system is uncontrollable and susceptible to potential manipulation, leading many people to doubt the integrity of the elections, which is why a transparent, verifiable, and trust-rebuilding system is required.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar called upon Siim Pohlak to speak.
Siim Pohlak
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Siim Pohlak is requesting clarification regarding the procedure for addressing the Venice Commission, asking whether the entire Riigikogu must initiate the process or how exactly it is done, and whether the coalition parties might be motivated to receive feedback or an assessment on e-elections from the Commission.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme said that they have initiated an appeal by the Riigikogu to the Venice Commission to assess the integrity of the elections, and he stressed that if the elections are unfair or rigged, the impact of this will spread to all state institutions, from presidential electors to judges.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar asks Andres Sutt to come forward and speak.
Andres Sutt
AI Summary
Andres Sutt says that before every election, comprehensive security tests are conducted on the e-voting and election information systems, and all procedures are verified by information systems auditors holding international professional certifications. He then raises questions regarding the independence and competence of these auditors, and also asks which countries, besides Estonia, provide a secure e-identity for all their citizens.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme emphasizes that while there is control against external attacks, the dangers posed by internal attacks remain unseen. Furthermore, auditors only check the end, not the beginning or the content, which is why it is unknown who gains access to the ballot box and what is ultimately placed inside it.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invited Varro Vooglaid to speak.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid stated that Estonia ought to approach the Venice Commission to get an assessment of whether e-voting complies with the principles of democracy and the rule of law. He also discussed whether the Riigikogu or, if necessary, the President should be the one to initiate this step themselves.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
He says he hasn't talked politics in Kadriorg in a long time, and maybe it's high time to start campaigning there. And that is the next step we need to take.
Mario Kadastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kadastik said that Estonia is the only country where all citizens have a digital, guaranteed, and controlled electronic identity that enables e-voting, and in other countries this is often lacking due to historical systems and the absence of public will, and voluntary trials usually yield results with very low participation, which is why those countries cannot transition to central national systems. Do you have any objections to this, and did you personally vote electronically or via paper?
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar calls upon Mario Kadastik.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme claims that e-voting is a myth, arguing that it is better to vote using paper ballots because doing so locks in the vote, preventing anyone from using it later on your behalf. He cites examples from Finland and other countries, and rejects the assertion that Estonia is a leader in the use of electronic identity.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
We will take one more brief question and then invite Anti Poolamets to speak.
Anti Poolamets
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Anti Poolamets voiced very serious concern regarding the growing legitimacy issue in Rakvere, claiming that votes are being purchased using ID cards, with 40 euros being paid to collect hundreds of votes, even though the police lack evidence.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
According to Martin Helme, getting rid of e-voting is not going to happen, and Parliament won't take action. The Supreme Court finds reasons not to hear the case, and a referendum won't solve the issue either. Consequently, public awareness must be raised and work must continue to prevent the emergence of a one-party system.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar proposed extending today's sitting until 2 PM if the debate has not concluded by 1 PM, and subsequently put the proposal to a vote in the Riigikogu.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Nineteen members of the Riigikogu are in favor of the proposal, and there are no opponents or abstentions; the session has been extended, and next, sworn attorney Paul Kerese will take the Riigikogu podium for a presentation lasting up to 20 minutes.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Attorney-at-law Paul Keres stressed that a democratic state governed by the rule of law dictates that the final decision must rest with the court. He criticized the reliability of electronic voting and put forward three proposals for reforming the handling of election complaints: allowing complaints filed in the public interest, extending the relevant deadlines, and implementing a two-stage procedure—starting at the administrative court and, if necessary, proceeding to the Supreme Court—along with the involvement of expert opinions.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanks the presenter and announces that questions are coming next, starting with Mario Kadastik.
Mario Kadastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kadastik asks why the results of electronic elections are repeatedly and unsuccessfully challenged in the name of EKRE, and why these procedures are not utilized during the entire period between two elections—a time when it would be possible to review the procedures, challenge subordinate legislation, and further develop the process—instead of only a couple of days after the elections.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Attorney-at-Law Paul Keres stated that regarding the two main election complaints represented last year, one action was, in the court's assessment, still carried out, and the second concerned the unlawful transfer to the State Information System Authority. He emphasized that such errors must be addressed immediately upon discovery, and the court should react to them.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar presents a request to Rain Epler.
Rain Epler
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Rain Epler emphasizes that although the legislative framework protects the serious consideration of problems within the e-voting system, for the sake of democracy, we must opt for slowness and less convenience, because excessive convenience causes the coalition to no longer adhere to the laws, and this makes the rest of life inconvenient.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Attorney-at-law Paul Keres stated that while the law protects e-voting, he does not fully agree with it. He believes the goal of the election complaint procedure should be to achieve legal clarity as quickly as possible, but the current complex system is inadequate. Furthermore, judicial practice demonstrates that no substantive resolution is reached, and ultimately, it is the responsibility of the members of the Riigikogu to decide what form elections should take.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invited Urve Tiidus to the stage.
Urve Tiidus
Profiling Eesti Reformierakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Urve Tiidus pointed to the gradual growth in the use of e-voting and asked whether a lawyer would be prepared to defend in court those voters who trust e-voting and consider doubts about the validity of their vote to be unfair.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Sworn attorney Paul Keres stated that he is prepared to represent anyone in court with whom an agreement can be reached. However, under the current election procedure, individuals are not actually able to lodge complaints. Furthermore, even if they trust e-voting, it is difficult to imagine what kind of complaint they could possibly file (perhaps a claim if e-elections were canceled), which remains purely theoretical.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman calls upon Martin Helme to speak.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme voiced concerns that the votes cast in the ballot box might not reflect the will of the people, stressing that an honest election result must be secured before any legislative amendments are introduced.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Attorney-at-law Paul Keres emphasizes that although electronic voting raises concerns, the legitimacy of democracy and state power, along with the simplification of filing complaints, constitute important common ground that parliamentary debate should uphold.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman invites Kalle Grünthal to the stage.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Grünthal noted during the Supreme Court hearing that paper voting requires checking the match between the face and the document, and the vote cannot be changed later, whereas e-voting only requires a valid ID card, and the vote may be changed. Since his claims were not reviewed due to their untimely submission, he then asked whether the elections are uniform under the constitution.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
When interpreting the Constitution, one must consider the circumstances in which the people found themselves at the moment they adopted it, and in light of this, today's elections can be deemed consistent.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar called Varro Vooglaid to the stage.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid asserts that e-voting and paper-based voting are fundamentally different, particularly regarding identity verification. He criticizes the fact that during the period between elections, these issues are ignored in favor of exacerbating the problems. Finally, he asks whether Kadastik and his colleagues are prepared to incorporate these three specific proposals into the existing law.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Sworn Advocate Paul Keres asserts that drafting the provision into the law is roughly half a day’s work and does not require excessive resources, and although there are differing opinions regarding uniformity, the existing differences do not render the elections constitutionally distinct.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar called upon Martin Helme to speak.
Martin Helme
Profiling Eesti Konservatiivse Rahvaerakonna fraktsioonAI Summary
Martin Helme notes that the Supreme Court has issued about 70 rulings concerning e-elections, only one of which actually resolved anything. He suggests that a myth has arisen claiming the court has given a final assessment on uniformity and other election issues. However, he asks whether the Supreme Court has actually commented on constitutionality or the compatibility of the first Sunday of March with the duration of the elections, whether the limits for withdrawing a paper vote and changing an electronic vote are clear, and whether the Supreme Court's legal certainty truly exists.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
He said that, as far as I know, there are no final positions.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invites Kert Kingo to the stage.
Kert Kingo
AI Summary
Kert Kingo asks whether Estonia, as a state governed by the rule of law, ensures sufficient protection for people who appeal to the court based on evidence presented regarding the election results and claim that they should have been elected.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Attorney Paul Keres claims that a complaint filed in this manner is protected by existing law, provided the person can prove that fewer votes were specifically counted for him than he actually received, but this is difficult to prove.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman invited Henn Põlluaas to speak.
Henn Põlluaas
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Henn Põlluaas asks whether the Estonian e-voting system complies with international standards, including the requirements set by the Council of Europe in 2017, which cover unique identification and authentication, ensuring secrecy at all stages, the one-vote principle, accurate representation of the e-voter's intent, the immutability of the sealed vote, the detectability of undue influence, and the verifiability of evidence through independent means, and whether, against this background, it can be stated that the Estonian e-voting system adheres to the established international standards.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
The essence of the matter is that in a fundamental legal dispute of this nature, the final say rests with the court, and the court must therefore deliberate on these questions. However, these issues have not yet been brought before the court, and consequently, no substantive ruling has been received.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invited Rene Kokk to speak.
AI Summary
Rene Kokk emphasizes that the Supreme Court has repeatedly made remarks regarding e-elections, but nothing has been done, and asks how to break free from this situation, accusing the coalition of a lack of political will and arguing that the current status quo suits the Reform Party just fine. He further adds that he has represented a complainant in court on the issue of e-elections and questions how to assess cooperation with institutions like the Republic's Electoral Commission and their willingness to rectify the shortcomings that have been highlighted for years.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
Attorney-at-law Paul Keres notes that the State Electoral Service and the Republic Electoral Committee have demonstrated indifference, and the legislator has not sufficiently regulated electronic voting—due to which it must be possible to vote electronically. Furthermore, for every election cycle, the State Electoral Service and the Electoral Committee prepare new rules, which should fundamentally be stipulated in law, not in administrative acts, a point the Supreme Court has emphasized.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar invites Varro Vooglaid to speak.
Varro Vooglaid
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Varro Vooglaid offered his thanks and noted that not a single one of the 68 complaints resulted in the Supreme Court drawing substantive conclusions regarding the existing electoral system. He characterized this as a grim reality in a democratic state, demonstrating that the right to appeal is largely fictitious. He then asked for opinions on how to approach the proposal put forward by Märt Põder and his colleagues to officially extend the right to appeal, at least, to election observers.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
This strikes me as a reasonable compromise, as public interest litigation has been legalized, and it has facilitated the filing of complaints in defense of the public interest concerning matters of planning, nature conservation, and environmental protection. Moreover, I don't see this being abused within the judicial system—quite the opposite: election observers should certainly have the right to file general complaints based on the public interest.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
During the speech, Kert Kingo is addressed and asked to come up onto the stage.
Kert Kingo
AI Summary
Kert Kingo notes that the lawyer has said that the protection of individual rights in matters concerning votes is sufficiently guaranteed by law, and proving them is very difficult. However, the unreasonably short preservation period for e-votes and their rapid destruction raises the question of how this contributes to the protection of rights and the ability to obtain justice in court.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
When evidence is lost, the protection of rights becomes impossible. Nevertheless, legal remedies are available in Estonia, and any individual may seek judicial protection. Crucially, though, the collection of evidence and its intelligible presentation necessitates an expert opinion drafted by specialists.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar thanked the esteemed presenter and announced that there were no further questions.
Vandeadvokaat Paul Keres
AI Summary
It was just a short thank you.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar opens the debate, announces the proposal that faction representatives speak first, and invites Aleksandr Tšaplõgin to the podium on behalf of the Riigikogu Centre Faction.
Aleksandr Tšaplõgin
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Aleksandr Chaplygin claims that e-elections are neither sufficiently transparent nor reliable, and nearly half the population does not trust them. Therefore, they must be suspended until solutions are implemented that make them absolutely trustworthy, even though the government plans to expand them to include mobile voting.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chair thanked the assembly, introduced the next speaker, Andre Hanimägi, and informed them that there was a request to take the floor on behalf of the Social Democratic Party faction.
Andre Hanimägi
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Andre Hanimägi emphasizes that it has been possible to vote online in Estonia for 20 years, and e-voting remains popular, even though trust has decreased and polarization has grown. However, he notes that evidence of election fraud is absent, and e-votes are consistent with polling results and may increase voter turnout. He then requests two more minutes.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
He is asking for two minutes of extra time.
Andre Hanimägi
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Andre Hanimägi stated that the organization and security issues surrounding e-elections must be regulated more comprehensively in the law than they are currently. While discussions aimed at improving them are sensible, there is no reason whatsoever, after 20 years, to abolish e-voting.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The speaker thanks the colleague and yields the floor of the Riigikogu to Hendrik Johannes Terras on behalf of the Eesti 200 faction, who requests an additional three minutes.
Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
The Eesti 200 faction affirms its commitment to the further development and expansion of e-voting, emphasizing that distrust toward e-voting stems more from age and experience than from technology itself, and that the integrity of democracy relies on transparency, legality, and equal electoral opportunities for everyone.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar, in his speech, urged the listeners to take action, declaring that it was their time.
Hendrik Johannes Terras
AI Summary
Hendrik Johannes Terras said that political noise must not impede the modernization of public services.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Hussar announces that the next item is a question directed to colleagues Sutt and Kadastik, and Andres Sutt will speak from the Riigikogu rostrum on behalf of the Reform Party faction.
Andres Sutt
AI Summary
Andres Sutt confirmed that e-elections ensure the functioning of democracy through secure e-identity and are constitutionally equal to conventional elections, and he invited interested parties to visit valimised.ee for a more thorough investigation.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar announced three minutes of extra time.
Andres Sutt
AI Summary
Andres Sutt confirmed that Estonia's e-voting system is reliable, and that thorough audits and international controls verify the secrecy, the resilience of the information systems, and the independence of the voter. Furthermore, he stated that the election outcome is influenced solely by the voter's will, the party's platform and candidates, and not by the method of voting itself.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman thanks everyone and invites colleague Mario Kadastik to speak next.
Mario Kadastik
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Mario Kadastik stated that electronic voting is technologically simple, secure, and verifiable, but the debate surrounding it was too one-sided. He noted a lack of clear explanations and auditing procedures, emphasizing the need for greater transparency, training, and a discussion that incorporates counterarguments, all aimed at increasing public trust in democracy.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Speaker of the Riigikogu, Lauri Hussar, asked Ants Frosch whether he wished to take the floor on behalf of the EKRE faction; when he answered in the negative, Kalle Grünthal was directed to the rostrum, and he requested three minutes of additional time.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Kalle Grünthal greets his colleagues and the people of Estonia, mentions Ants Frosch and Varro Vooglaid, and praises them, saying that there are at least two people present in the hall.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar offered a brief clarification and stated that the number is three.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
He apologizes and addresses the presiding officer.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar asks Kalle Grünthal to take the floor.
Kalle Grünthal
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Grünthal asserts that Estonian elections lack uniformity and that the secrecy of e-voting is not guaranteed. This is because only the ID card is verified and the vote can be changed multiple times, leading to the conclusion that e-voting must be terminated.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
The Chairman offers his thanks and invites his colleague, Ants Frosch, to the podium.
Ants Frosch
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Ants Frosch expressed concern that Estonia's e-voting success story is turning into a fiasco, highlighting criticism from the OSCE report and emphasizing the need for transparency, quality assurance, and end-to-end verifiability. He warned that if these problems are not addressed, the Estonian e-voting system could collapse.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar requested three minutes of extra time.
Ants Frosch
Profiling Fraktsiooni mittekuuluvad Riigikogu liikmedAI Summary
Ants Frosch invited journalists and international experts, including OSCE report author Carsten Schürmann, for an interview and said that if the e-elections cannot be put in order, they must be stopped.
Esimees Lauri Hussar
AI Summary
Chairman Lauri Hussar thanks his colleagues, concludes the debate, and stresses that upon the discussion's end, the Riigikogu will not adopt a decision, the agenda is exhausted, the sitting and the week are over, and we will meet next week in the Riigikogu's main hall.