Agenda Profile: Peeter Ernits
Draft law amending the Church and Religious Communities Act (570 UA) – second reading
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to Draft Bill 570 UA (the Act Amending the Churches and Congregations Act), considering it unconstitutional and motivated by societal fear and paranoia. His/Her viewpoint is value-based, stressing the danger of a preventative state approach and warning against the rise of a future surveillance society ("Big Brother"). He/She confirms that he/she consistently voted against the measure on the previous occasion as well.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates awareness of the legal and security implications of the draft bill, citing its potential unconstitutionality and the role of the Security Police (KAPO). He offers a concrete alternative: increasing KAPO funding to allow swift and robust intervention against specific threats, rather than implementing broad preventative laws. He also touches upon artificial intelligence (AI) and database collection as future threats.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and pressing, calling on colleagues "to come to their senses." He employs both personal value appeals (his mother's advice not to go against the church) and strong logical arguments against state overregulation. The speaker uses pointed metaphors, comparing state governance to the management of livestock and characterizing the draft bill as material only fit for the trash can.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker participated in the previous vote and mentions that they have since deliberated and received confirmation from several "very influential Estonian people." This points to active consultation and internal discussion regarding important legislative matters in order to validate their position.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary targets of criticism are the bill's proponents' preemptive and paranoid approach to state governance, as well as the general atmosphere of fear prevalent in society. He/She also criticizes actions related to changing the name of the Russian Theatre or the notion of banning a language, deeming them irrational and part of the same alarming trend. The opposition is intense and philosophical, fundamentally rejecting the preventative approach upon which the bill is based.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
His collaborative style involves consulting influential individuals outside the Riigikogu, whose opinions he respects, in order to confirm his political position. He also notes that his stance aligns with that of other colleagues who may have been less certain during the previous vote, thereby signaling potential allies.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is primarily on national security and constitutional issues, but it also addresses the cross-border context, specifically referring to Kirill "on the other side of the Narva River." Domestic cultural and linguistic tensions are also mentioned, citing the renaming of the Russian Theatre as an example.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views directly impact the funding of the security sector, where the speaker supports increasing the budget of the Security Police (KAPO) if the need arises. He believes that allocating funds to existing structures is a better solution for ensuring security than creating new legislation.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The central social issue revolves around the balance between national security and civil and religious freedoms, with the speaker strongly advocating for the latter. He takes a stand against preventive legislation motivated by fear and stresses the importance of respecting the church, even though he is not religious himself. Furthermore, he criticizes proposals for cultural and linguistic restrictions (specifically mentioning the Russian Theatre and the Russian language).
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on opposing Bill 570 UA (the Law Amending the Law on Churches and Congregations), as it is considered poorly drafted and fit only for the trash bin. He also warns against future bills concerning artificial intelligence and the aggregation of databases, viewing them as a threat to freedom and state control.
1 Speeches Analyzed