Session Profile: Aleksei Jevgrafov
15th Estonian Parliament, third sitting, information briefing
2024-04-10
Political Position
The political focus is currently centered on the strong opposition to revoking the voting rights of permanent residents (over 70,000 people) in local elections—a move widely regarded as unreasonable and unconstitutional. This stance is well-argued, drawing on integration studies that demonstrate the connection between loyalty and citizenship, as well as constitutional concerns, specifically referencing the warnings issued by the Chancellor of Justice. The speaker also casts doubt on the Prime Minister's earlier arguments regarding Russian influence, dismissing them as baseless.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in integration policy and social sciences, citing specific studies and the positions held by social scientist Marju Lauristin. Knowledge of constitutional law is also presented, highlighting the Chancellor of Justice’s stance on the issue of voting rights. Furthermore, the speaker demonstrates detailed awareness of the complex and practical bureaucratic hurdles involved in renouncing Russian citizenship.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal, logical, and well-reasoned, utilizing both factual data (research findings) and emotional appeal (a specific example of the vicious cycle of renouncing citizenship). The speaker adopts a challenging stance toward the prime minister, demanding substantial arguments and calling into question the very foundations of the government's policy. Following an interruption, the argument was resumed, demonstrating persistence in conveying their viewpoint.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker participated in the Riigikogu information session, posing repeated and substantive questions to the Prime Minister on the topic of voting rights. Their pattern of activity also includes addressing citizens' concerns, as evidenced by a reference to a specific applicant who is unable to renounce their Russian citizenship.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opposition is directed against the policy of the Prime Minister and the governing coalition regarding the revocation of voting rights. The criticism is both political and fact-based, calling into question the foundation of the Prime Minister's previous arguments and labeling the proposed move as short-sighted.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker points to support from coalition partners (Social Democrats) and the Chancellor of Justice, demonstrating a willingness to leverage institutional and cross-party support to challenge the government's policy. This suggests an openness to cooperation with those who share the position on retaining the right to vote.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is at the national level (loyalty to the Estonian state, constitutional rights), while simultaneously addressing the rights and practical issues of permanent residents living in Estonia, including citizens of Russia. The Vilnius embassy is also mentioned in connection with the complexity of renouncing citizenship, which broadens the focus to include international bureaucracy.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views are absent, apart from the mention that permanent residents without voting rights are law-abiding taxpayers, which is used as an argument for their loyalty and rights. No other positions on taxes, regulation, or economic growth are presented.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The main social issue is integration and civil rights, particularly the right of permanent residents of other nationalities to vote in local elections. The speaker emphasizes that loyalty to the state is not tied to citizenship and defends the rights of those people who were born and raised in Estonia and who are being prevented from renouncing their citizenship.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is currently on the strong opposition to a draft bill that seeks to strip permanent residents of their right to vote in local elections. The speaker emphasizes that this move is unconstitutional and points to the Chancellor of Justice's readiness to appeal to the Supreme Court if the law is adopted.
3 Speeches Analyzed