Session Profile: Raimond Kaljulaid
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
2024-11-20
Political Position
The political position heavily focuses on amending the constitution to restrict the voting rights of citizens of hostile states (Russia, Belarus) in local elections. The speaker strongly supports the coalition's draft bill, emphasizing its consistency with Isamaa's own previous platform, and accuses the opposition (Isamaa) of incompetence and holding the Riigikogu (Parliament) hostage. This stance is geared toward finding a solution, contrasting sharply with the previous failure to resolve this issue.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in constitutional law and legislative procedure, critically analyzing the deficiencies of Isamaa’s draft legislation and its conflict with the constitution. To support the arguments, the speaker uses historical political data (Tallinn election results 2005/2009) and references the digital information system for the bills. Particular emphasis is placed on legal precision, specifically distinguishing between citizens of aggressor states and persons with undetermined citizenship.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is highly combative, sharply critical, and directly confrontational, utilizing strong expressions such as "it's not even fit under a cat's tail" and accusing opponents of pursuing the path of "legal nihilism." The speaker employs both logical argumentation (referencing explanatory memorandums and election platforms) and emotional appeals (the question of "manliness"). He uses political anecdotes (the changing of Tallinn's election rules) to discredit his opponents.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker's mode of operation is reactive and operative, involving active participation in the plenary debate and immediate responses to the criticism and accusations of stalling leveled by previous speakers (especially Isamaa and EKRE). He/She is focused on defending the coalition's actions and accelerating the proceedings of the draft legislation.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are Isamaa and EKRE, who are accused of hypocrisy (an inability to solve the issue while in government) and incompetence (submitting draft legislation that contradicts the constitution). The criticism is intense and targets both the political substance and procedural correctness, specifically accusing Isamaa of holding the Riigikogu hostage.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker operates within the framework of the coalition, defending the coalition's joint bill as the only "normal, proper" solution. Although he rejects the substance of the opposition's bill, he welcomes Isamaa's readiness to be flexible in further proceedings.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The primary emphasis is on national legislation (constitutional amendment) and the international context (the aggressor states Russia and Belarus). Regionally, the history of the Tallinn local government elections (2005–2009) is used as an example of the unintended consequences of political maneuvers.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Among the social issues addressed are citizenship and voting rights, defending the position that individuals with undetermined citizenship cannot be associated with Russia’s aggression. The speaker emphasizes that these individuals are not pertinent to the matter, and restricting their right to vote would be unjust.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on initiating and supporting a constitutional amendment bill concerning the restriction of voting rights in local elections. The speaker emphasizes the legal soundness and efficiency of the coalition's bill and actively opposes the opposition's draft, arguing that it is legally deficient and contradicts the constitution.
3 Speeches Analyzed