Session Profile: Züleyxa Izmailova
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
2025-06-12
Political Position
The political stance is one of strong opposition, focusing on criticizing the deficiencies in the minister's performance and lack of transparency. The primary emphasis is on scrutinizing the government's activities and opposing the concealment of analyses commissioned using public funds. The position is strongly value-driven and procedural, stressing the necessity of the right to speak out and robust parliamentary oversight.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the legal domain, procedures for commissioning analyses of draft legislation, and mechanisms of parliamentary oversight. He/She is familiar with specific legal documents (service contracts) and the roles of institutions such as the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner and the Data Protection Inspectorate. This knowledge is used to call into question the legal legitimacy of the minister's activities.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, accusatory, and emotionally charged, expressing personal frustration and embarrassment regarding the minister's responses. Direct accusations are employed (e.g., "Why are you hiding the analyses?") along with rhetorical questions to highlight the minister's unethical conduct. The tone remains formal, but the content is confrontational, focusing on ethical and procedural appeals.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker's pattern of activity suggests persistence and consistent follow-up, as evidenced by the issue first arising last autumn and the subsequent appeal to the Data Protection Inspectorate. This demonstrates the speaker's willingness to utilize multiple oversight mechanisms to obtain the required information.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The confrontation is aimed at the minister responsible for the justice sector, sharply criticizing his actions and ethical conduct in the Riigikogu hall. The criticism is both procedural (hiding analyses, classifying them as internal) and personal (denying the right to speak, causing embarrassment). The speaker directly accuses the minister of obstructing parliamentary oversight.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperation style refers to collaboration with colleagues in the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) (referencing "my colleague's previously submitted question") and with specific oversight bodies (the Equal Opportunities Commissioner, the Data Protection Inspectorate). This cooperation is aimed at scrutinizing the government's activities and demanding transparency. There is no information available regarding the seeking of compromises with the ruling coalition.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data. The focus is directed at national legislation and the work of the Riigikogu.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic views focus on the transparency and accountability concerning the use of public funds (the people's money). The speaker demands that analyses commissioned using public money must not be restricted to internal official use, emphasizing fiscal responsibility.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The focus regarding social issues is the theme of equality, which is being addressed in connection with the analysis of the draft Unified Equal Rights Act. Emphasis is placed on the need to ensure transparency in the legislative process concerning socially sensitive matters, supporting the right of the Commissioner and Parliament to information.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is centered on ensuring parliamentary oversight and transparency within the law-making process, particularly regarding the draft Omnibus Equality Act. The speaker is acting as a critic of the government’s actions, demanding the public release of commissioned analyses.
2 Speeches Analyzed