Session Profile: Mario Kadastik
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
2024-05-09
Political Position
The political position involves strong support for Estonia’s e-voting system, which is considered technologically elegant and unique due to the national digital identity framework. The speaker defends the system against politically motivated attacks, stressing that the opposition is essentially a tactic for refusing to acknowledge election results. The focus is heavily policy- and value-driven, emphasizing the reliability and trustworthiness of the digital society.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates profound technical expertise on the topic of e-voting, employing cryptographic and mathematical terminology to explain the system's security and confidentiality. He/She highlights the uniqueness of Estonia's digital identity and offers comparisons with other countries where e-voting has not taken root due to citizen will or historical systemic factors. He/She also refers to the specific necessity for auditing and procedural regulations.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is analytical, confident, and at times confrontational, especially when questioning the motives of opponents. The appeals are primarily logical and technical, explaining the system's simplicity and contrasting the security of the e-vote with the easy falsifiability of the paper vote (for instance, using the example of a pen with disappearing ink). He/She criticizes the imbalance of the debate and calls it a political ball game.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is highly active during the plenary session, intervening repeatedly with both procedural questions (the right to reply) and substantive remarks. His interventions are often reactive, responding to the fact that he was repeatedly mentioned in earlier speeches.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
There is strong opposition to EKRE’s tactic of challenging the election results, criticizing their lack of success and repeated procedural errors (e.g., the untimely filing of the complaint or addressing the wrong entity). The speaker considers the opponents’ concerns to be merely a political pretext for refusing to acknowledge the election results, rather than a substantive technical problem.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker is cooperative with coalition partners, supporting and supplementing the positions of colleague Sutt regarding e-voting. He/She emphasizes that, in order to balance the debate and clarify the procedures, representatives from RIA (the Information System Authority) or the National Electoral Committee should have been present, referencing the desire to involve technical experts.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is both national (covering the Estonian e-voting system and the procedures of the National Electoral Committee) and international, comparing Estonia's solutions with the systems used in other countries. He refers to conversations with ambassadors from numerous countries who have expressed interest in adopting the Estonian system.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The speaker emphasizes the importance of civic will in the adoption of electronic identity, noting that this also brings other benefits. This links the acceptance of digital identity to broader social values and the trustworthiness of the digital society.
4 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on improving the clarity of election procedures and rules, and on auditing them during the period between elections. He criticizes the fact that lower-level acts and procedures are always challenged just a few days after the elections, rather than during the interim period when the system could actually be improved.
4 Speeches Analyzed