Session Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
2024-11-20
Political Position
The political position is strongly value-based, focusing on the defense of the Estonian nation-state and restricting suffrage exclusively to Estonian citizens. The speaker vehemently opposes granting voting rights to individuals with undetermined citizenship, viewing this as the defilement of the constitution, a security threat, and the destruction of children's future. The stance is resolute and uncompromising, emphasizing the constitutional status of the nation-state.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in constitutional and legislative procedure, referencing specific bill numbers (536 and 527) and their handling within the Constitutional Committee. A crucial area of knowledge involves the legal definitions of suffrage and citizenship, and their impact on national security. Furthermore, the speaker exhibits knowledge concerning the committee's rules of procedure and transparency requirements.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetoric is highly combative, emotional, and urgent, employing strong and negative metaphors (e.g., "defiling the constitution," "dancing with a gas scarf"). The appeal is directed primarily at national values and the future of children, stressing the security threat. The speaker aggressively demands answers and transparency from the opposing side, particularly concerning commission votes.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker was active during one plenary session (20.11.2024), repeatedly participating in the debate on voting rights with questions and remarks. This pattern of activity indicates a focus on the handling of a specific draft bill and criticism of the committee's work. The interventions were directed straight at the rapporteur and the presiding officer.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the Social Democrats (Sotsid), who are accused of protecting the interests of ‘grey passport holders’ (stateless residents) and acting against the interests of the Estonian state. The Reform Party is criticized for hypocrisy because they demand the removal of voting rights from citizens of the aggressor state but fail to support the draft legislation that would make this possible. The criticism is intense, accusing opponents of destroying the state and posing a security threat.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of engagement is purely oppositional and critical, focusing on exposing the motives and actions of the ruling coalition (Social Democrats, Reform Party). There is a complete absence of any indication of a willingness to compromise; instead, the unconstitutionality and danger of the opposing side's actions are emphasized.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is strictly at the national and international level, addressing Estonia’s constitutional order and the security threat. The international dimension is limited to the issue of voting rights for citizens of aggressor states (Russia, Belarus).
6 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is citizenship and the right to vote, which is viewed through the prism of the nation-state and security. The speaker is resolutely opposed to granting political rights to individuals with undefined citizenship status, fearing the destruction of Estonia's national identity and future.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative priority is restricting suffrage solely to Estonian citizens, supporting the corresponding bill (implicitly 527) and opposing alternative proposals (536). A key focus is also placed on ensuring transparency in the work of the Constitutional Committee and demanding the public disclosure of voting results.
6 Speeches Analyzed