Agenda Profile: Jüri Jaanson
Draft law amending the Code of Civil Procedure Implementation Act and the Enforcement Proceedings Implementation Act (439 SE) – First Reading
2024-10-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly supportive of the amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure, which would establish the possibility of retroactive review dating back to 2006. This stance is principled: legal certainty is not absolute, and the judicial system must be given the opportunity to conduct proceedings anew upon the emergence of new circumstances. The speaker distances themselves from their faction’s official position, emphasizing their personal conviction regarding the principles of justice.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The presenter exhibits a high level of expertise regarding civil procedure law and the principles of legal certainty, making specific reference to the 2006 edition of the Code of Civil Procedure and the technical specifics concerning the possibility of revision (or extraordinary appeal). They elaborate on the legislative history of the draft act and its correlation with the subsequent discovery of particular materials, employing precise legal terminology throughout.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is analytical, formal, and legally substantiated, emphasizing logical appeals (e.g., the independence of the judiciary). The tone is confident and occasionally defensive, particularly when the Commission’s unilateral approach is criticized. The speaker’s objective is to answer questions and clarify the background of the draft legislation, not to campaign for votes.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is actively participating in the legislative debate, initially raising questions regarding the bill's background and rationale, and subsequently strongly defending its substance and the necessity of continuing the proceedings. He/She references prior proceedings during the previous convocation of the Riigikogu, demonstrating consistent effort in advocating for this issue.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main criticism is aimed at the position taken by the Chairman of the Legal Affairs Committee and the Committee itself, who stand accused of taking a biased stance and recommending the rejection of the draft bill. The criticism targets procedural unfairness and the fact that the Committee ignored the nuances within the Government of the Republic's opinion concerning the absolute nature of legal certainty.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of collaboration is independent and principled, as the speaker stresses that they are representing themselves and their viewpoint does not align with the faction's official position. They answer colleagues’ questions directly and thoroughly, but make no mention of openness to compromise or cross-party cooperation.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on amending the Act Implementing the Code of Civil Procedure. This amendment aims to ensure that the Supreme Court has the ability to conduct independent and lawful judicial proceedings when new circumstances arise. The speaker is a strong supporter and advocate of this draft legislation (439 SE), stressing that it is the duty of the legislature to create the necessary conditions for independent proceedings.
4 Speeches Analyzed