Agenda Profile: Kalle Grünthal
Re-examination of the Act Amending the Act Preventing Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing and the Act on International Sanctions (640 UA), which was not announced by the President of the Republic
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
Political Position
The political stance is fiercely opposed to the government's proposed bill (640 UA), arguing that it endangers the constitutional order and paves the way for a totalitarian surveillance society. This position is fundamentally value-based, stressing the need to protect citizens' rights and trust from excessive state interference. The speaker views the passage of this bill as an outright incitement to engage in unconstitutional actions.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates competence in legislative procedures, emphasizing the necessity of addressing the proposed bill's conflict with the relevant European Union directive. Furthermore, they exhibit knowledge of constitutional and criminal law, citing specific sections of the Penal Code regarding crimes against the state (Sections 235 and 236). They also draw upon concrete facts, including the inspections of tens of thousands of bank accounts identified by the Office of the Chancellor of Justice.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, dramatic, and urgent, employing strong moral and legal accusations. The speaker utilizes both emotional appeals (distrust, totalitarianism) and a legal framework, accusing the government of implementing unconstitutional actions. The style involves quoting and criticizing specific opponents (Riina Sikkut) while simultaneously praising allies (Urmas Reinsalu).
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is highly active in debates within the Riigikogu chamber, specifically focusing on the reconsideration of legislation vetoed by the President. This record demonstrates involvement in critical legislative processes, often emphasizing procedural flaws and a lack of constitutional compliance. Information regarding activities outside the parliamentary hall is unavailable.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opponents are the government and its coalition partners, who stand accused of preparing unconstitutional actions and inciting criminal activity. The Social Democrats (Riina Sikkut) are being criticized for legitimizing the surveillance of citizens, which the speaker considers a hallmark of totalitarianism. The criticism is intense and fundamental, precluding any compromise in the struggle against the proposed model for establishing a surveillance society.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker is cooperating with opposition colleagues and specifically commends Urmas Reinsalu for his constitutional arguments against the surveillance society. Cooperation with the ruling coalition is ruled out entirely, given that this is a principled confrontation where the government's activities are viewed as undermining the constitutional order.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on national constitutional issues, the domestic threat posed by a surveillance society, and compliance with European Union law. There is no focus on specific local or regional topics.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
A strong emphasis is placed on civil liberties, privacy, and protection against state surveillance, which is framed as the realization of totalitarianism. The monitoring of bank accounts without informing citizens is presented as a grave violation of trust and the rule of law. The speaker stands firmly in defense of individual freedoms jeopardized by security considerations.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently centered on opposing the Act amending the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Prevention Act and the International Sanctions Act (Bill 640 UA). The speaker is a strong opponent of the draft legislation, demanding that it be brought into compliance with both the Constitution and the relevant European Union directive, the discussion of which the government has refused to engage in.
2 Speeches Analyzed