Agenda Profile: Kalle Grünthal
Second Reading of the Draft Act (344 SE) on the Amendment of the Riigikogu Election Act and Related Amendment of Other Acts
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The speaker expresses extremely strong opposition to the draft bill (344 SE) amending the Riigikogu Election Act, arguing that it violates the principles of uniformity and secrecy of elections established in Section 60 of the Constitution. This political position is intensely value-based and procedural, emphasizing strict adherence to the law (Section 3 of the Constitution) and accusing the Riigikogu Board of continuous legal violations. The illegality of the bill's processing is considered more significant than future taxes, such as the proposed car tax and sugar tax.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates in-depth knowledge of constitutional law and the organization of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), specifically citing articles of the Constitution (§ 3, § 60) and the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act. Specialized knowledge is clearly evident in the details of the electoral process, particularly when analyzing the differences in identity verification between paper and electronic voting. Furthermore, the speaker is familiar with the handling of previous election complaints by the Supreme Court (Riigikohus).
11 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speaker’s style is highly confrontational, accusatory, and legally precise, yet simultaneously employs strong emotional language (e.g., "in genuine bewilderment"). He bases his arguments on specific legal statutes, but also utilizes sharp rhetoric, comparing the session to a Soviet-era collective farm party meeting. He stresses the complete lack of trust, referencing Kaja Kallas’s prior dishonesty regarding tax matters.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is an active participant in the debate, repeatedly posing questions to the session chair and the rapporteur, and also delivering a lengthy address against the adoption of the draft bill. He refers to his previous activities, including filing election complaints with the Supreme Court and participating in the discussions of the Constitutional Committee. Furthermore, he draws attention to the working conditions of the Riigikogu staff (the Stenography Department).
11 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the Riigikogu Presidium and the presiding officer of the session, who are directly accused of violating the law and adopting unlawful decisions, especially regarding the handling of recesses and amendments. The opposition is intense and procedural, demanding that the Presidium convene a meeting to resolve the conflicts. The rapporteur (Terras) is also criticized for providing insufficient answers regarding the security of e-voting.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Insufficient data. The speaker's focus in this context is primarily on confrontation and procedural challenging, not cooperation.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Data is insufficient. The focus of the address is entirely at the national level—the procedural rules of the Riigikogu (Parliament) and the constitutionality of the election law.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic viewpoints have been presented in the context of the elections, where the argument is made that the integrity of the elections is more important than tax issues. The speaker suggests that if the right people are elected, unpopular taxes (such as the car tax or the sugar tax) will also be avoided, thereby linking the legitimacy of the elections directly to future fiscal policy.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data. The discussions focus on legal and electoral management issues.
11 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is on opposing the draft amendment (344 SE) to the Riigikogu Election Act, particularly the e-voting provisions concerning identity verification and the possibility of changing one's vote. The speaker is an active opponent who also submitted amendments, such as using a video link to verify identity. He/She emphasizes that the election of the individuals who govern the state should require identity verification that is at least as strict as that used for notarized transactions.
11 Speeches Analyzed