Agenda Profile: Kalle Grünthal
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 one of strong opposition to the bill under consideration, as it is unconstitutional and represents the poor quality of work—a "defect" or "shoddy work"—by the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). This stance is strongly value-based, emphasizing fidelity to the constitutional order and the principles of the rule of law. There is vigorous support for the position and motivated decision of the President of the Republic to reject the bill, and the coalition is criticized for disregarding this decision.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge of constitutional law and legislative procedures, referencing the Chancellor’s interventions and requiring a final court judgment for accountability. Technical terms like "to presume" are used, and references are made to the legal committee protocols, emphasizing the need to prove the violation of legal norms. The expertise focuses on the principles of the rule of law and the constitutional conformity of legislation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is combative and critical, expressing shame and embarrassment regarding the quality of the Riigikogu's work and accusing the presenter of "talking black into white." Both logical arguments (such as adherence to the constitution) and strong emotional and provocative imagery (for example, the analogy involving instruments of rape) are used to illustrate the danger inherent in the presumption of guilt. The tone is formal yet passionate, focusing on the fulfillment of oaths and obligations.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The operational patterns are linked to the ongoing legislative process in the Riigikogu, involving active participation in the second reading of the draft bill through questions and a final report. This refers to the Chancellor's triple intervention during the same year, demonstrating continuous focus on the quality of legislation and addressing prior procedural errors.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The principal adversaries are the coalition deputies and the rapporteur, who are criticized for pushing through unconstitutional draft bills, ignoring the President's position, and engaging in poor lawmaking ("flawed output"). The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural deficiencies and the violation of the principles of the rule of law. The opposition is absolute, demanding the termination of the bill's reading.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is confrontational, yet coalition MPs are simultaneously asked to support suspending the reading of the draft bill, which indicates a desire to find procedural consensus. They also rely on the claims presented by an external expert (Varro Vooglaid), confirming their validity.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Not enough data
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The social issue under discussion is religious freedom and the adherence to the principles of the rule of law concerning the Moscow Patriarchate. The speaker asserts that this is pure persecution and stresses that individuals or organizations can only be held accountable based on a final, legally binding conviction. Emphasis is placed on protecting civil liberties and the presumption of innocence.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is preventing the adoption of the draft amendment to the Law on Churches and Congregations, specifically by requesting the suspension of the reading. The speaker is a staunch opponent of the bill and is initiating procedural steps aimed at improving the quality of the Riigikogu’s legislative process, which, in their estimation, has repeatedly failed due to interventions by the Chancellor.
3 Speeches Analyzed